My experience of teaching both APL and J to college sophomores was that, despite the "difficulties" of the APL keyboard layout (with key tops having the APL symbols marked on them), the students found the APL character set quicker to learn, and remember, than the J symbols. And that for them it was easier to read the APL characters in code than the J symbols.
The APL symbol rho for reshape (and then its monadic use for shape) was quite mnemonic, even if not visually representative of the operation. On Tue, 25 Feb 2014 14:05:47 -0500, Devon McCormick <[email protected]> wrote: > I, too, am very fond of the APL characters but they are a mix of the > conceptually helpful - like ? (transpose) - and ad-hoc obscurities - ? > (rho). > > The J characters have a bit of ad-hockery about them but are extremely > well-integrated with respect to each other. > > Just look across any line of the vocabulary page. My favorite is > > - Negate ? Minus -. Not ? Less -: Halve ? Match > > Whenever I'm comparing a couple of things to see if they are the same or > how they differ, I find myself using numerous verbs from this line, e.g. if > two numeric tables don't match, is it because of small differences? If the > contents of two text files don't match, which lines are in one but not the > other? > > I think the richness of the relations between the J characters outweighs > the aesthetic advantage of the APL characters. —— Murray Eisenberg [email protected] Mathematics & Statistics Dept. Lederle Graduate Research Tower phone 240 246-7240 (H) University of Massachusetts 710 North Pleasant Street Amherst, MA 01003-9305 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
