How is the APL {lamp} symbol an improvement over
NB. as far as being more understandable/readable?
----- Original Message -----
From: Markus Triska <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wednesday, February 7, 2007 11:17 am
Subject: Re: [Jgeneral] Displaying J with Unicode Special Symbols
> Joey K Tuttle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > I agree with Roger that +/ and */ convey a concept better than Sigma
> > and Pi - and indeed, as he asks, "What about *./ etc.?"
>
> I agree with that. On the other hand, there are Unicode APL symbols
> that J can benefit from, like {lamp} (= U+235D) for comments.
>
> > All of this begs the issue that not only is it hard to communicate
> > using these symbols (I'm not even trying in this message) the
> > results are just plain UGLY in terms of display. (this may be a
> > bias from the hundreds of hours I have spent in trying to make APL
> > characters look nice) My opinion of the unicode APL characters is
> > that they look like a ransom note font (i.e. one clipped from
>
> Unicode doesn't specify how a symbol ought to be displayed, so you can
> use any font or method you like for display. Regarding communication:
> It's easy nowadays to install a Unicode-aware editor or use a UTF-8
> capable mailer; browsers support it too (try the group's web archive).
>
> All the best,
> Markus Triska
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
