Ok, since apparently what I wrote was confusing, here is an
explanation of the paragraph numbering I used:

Paragraph 1 begins "I am designing a J-like language..."

Paragraph 2 begins "Since you can have as many..."

Paragraph 3 begins "One thing I dislike is that..."

Paragraph 4 begins "Many words, like amend, use..."

The last paragraph begins "What we need is..."

I hope this helps you understand what I wrote.

Thanks,

-- 
Raul


On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 4:17 AM, Erling Hellenäs
<[email protected]> wrote:
> I think what I write about Amend is comprehensible to most of the audience
> so I avoid that discussion. You can see the JWithATwist solution in the
> manual.
> https://github.com/andrimne/JWithATwist.DocBook/blob/master/target/en/JWithATwistReferenceManual.pdf
>
> I don't understand your paragraph numbering and not to what you agree or
> disagree.
>
> These changes would create other problems like the one with rank and I don't
> know the solution to all these problems.
>
> You are all welcome to comment on my blog.
>
> J is the work of lots of scientists and very clever people over many years
> and these are my personal opinions. Ideas I play with in JWithATwist. Ideas
> which might show up as good or bad, clever or stupid when discussed,
> examined and tried.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Erling
>
>
>
>
> On 2016-08-11 00:16, Raul Miller wrote:
>>
>> Here is a rough sketch of my thinking on reading this presentation. I
>> do not know if you will find this helpful or not. But, you might, and
>> you spent some time and effort writing that, so... here goes:
>>
>> Paragraph 1: J allows an arbitrary number of arguments (0 or more) for
>> the right argument of a verb and an arbitrary number of optional
>> arguments for the left argument of a verb.
>>
>> Paragraph 2: I agree. And this holds true, also, for unboxed arguments.
>>
>> Paragraph 3: Hmm... I am not sure I agree with the objective parts of
>> this, but let's roll with it for now.
>>
>> Paragraph 4: Er... so, for example:
>>
>>     _1 _2 (1 2;3 4)} i.5 5
>>   0  1  2  3  4
>>   5  6 _1  8  9
>> 10 11 12 13 14
>> 15 16 17 18 _2
>> 20 21 22 23 24
>>
>> Here, I used boxed arguments to amend. So, there's that. But I am
>> guessing what you really meant is that you instead want something that
>> achieves the same result, but with arguments structured like this:
>>     amend _1 _2;(1 2;3 4);i.5 5
>>
>> (But of course this would create a new problem in the context of the
>> rank operator - you would need a new variation of the rank operator
>> which worked for arguments which are structured in this fashion.)
>>
>> (Also, that is not what you said, what you said flatly contradicts
>> what I know, and I think I showed an example of this... but that
>> probably means that I was just missing your actual point for other
>> paragraphs as well.)
>>
>> There actually are reasons to use short names - they are faster to
>> type, they fit in tweets, and they are more manageable in a "let's try
>> another variation of this again" than the longer names. That said, you
>> can look at things like OpenGL as a counter example - here, we have
>> long names and lots of them. But here also we have problems with
>> people declaring frequently used chunks of it "deprecated" despite how
>> many frequently used things would break if people actually stopped
>> supporting the older stuff.
>>
>> (Personally, I think obsolescence should become obsolete. And, in a
>> sense, it has been, but there's a lot of junk that falls by the
>> wayside over time, and that does become a problem...)
>>
>> ...
>>
>> Last paragraph: My above (x m} y) example is explicitly documented.
>> Specifically, the indexing behavior of } is defined in terms of { at
>> http://www.jsoftware.com/help/dictionary/d530n.htm and boxed indices
>> are mentioned at http://www.jsoftware.com/help/dictionary/d520.htm#.
>> So the implication that I understand (that amend supporting boxed
>> indices should be thought of as hidden information) probably is not
>> what you are referring to, here. But ... that leaves me not knowing
>> what you were thinking about here.
>>
>> Once again, I do not know if this will help you in any way, but I
>> think you were inviting comment, and this is as far as I got. (Plus,
>> you know, your page will stay up indefinitely, and my comments would
>> be invisible to most readers of your page, so there's that, also.)
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm

Reply via email to