Thanks for the insight. Perhaps the article would render J
more attractive to doubters if the Prolog verbs were explisitny...
Mike
On 17/09/2015 22:33, Dan Bron wrote:
The guy loves his automated translation.
As user @hoosierEE points out on the relevant question on SO, his J code was
very likely originally written using the explicit style, which he then
automatically converted to tacit using 13 :
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/31954474/which-programming-language-is-used-in-this-code#comment51943254_31954474
<http://stackoverflow.com/questions/31954474/which-programming-language-is-used-in-this-code#comment51943254_31954474>
One wonders if he bothers to inspect the results of the machine translation
(either the natural language or the computer code).
-Dan
On Sep 17, 2015, at 5:27 PM, Mike Day <[email protected]> wrote:
Seems to be Google-translated from Russian or other slavonic -
tasitnY, AyversonOM, menySTRIMNY and "in Prolog-E" are
strong pointers! Who's the author?
Now to look at prologom... (should be accusative really!)
So far, I'm having trouble loading the script. It fails on the
first verb, frq ... Trying '''' instead of "'', it then fails on
"parse" !
His/her verbs are certainly tasitny!
Thanks,
Mike
On 17/09/2015 16:23, 'Pascal Jasmin' via General wrote:
I did not write this
http://sysmagazine.com/posts/201470/
to see the internal representation,
parse prolog_code
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
