I think a dataframe, in J would basically be a boxed list of columns, and some associated list of column names.
It's the toolset we would build up to work with such a thing that would make it useful. (And maybe Jd is such a toolset? I do not know -- I have not motivated myself to try Jd yet...) -- Raul On Mon, Jan 31, 2022 at 7:44 PM Vanessa McHale <vamch...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I’ve tried Jd, it’s equivalent to pandas I think (and about as performant) > though it’s persistent (being a database). > > q/k is faster, I think because it’s ordered by default - maybe something like > ordered dataframes could be implemented in J? > > Cheers, > Vanessa McHale > > > On Jan 30, 2022, at 8:21 PM, Ric Sherlock <tikk...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Yes, I've been thinking that a Dataframes equivalent in J would be useful. > > Most things are already possible with J's arrays, but conceptually > > DataFrames are well understood by many now, and they make it easy to work > > with datasets as named fields. > > I've spent a reasonable amount of time working with Pandas, but have > > recently been using Polars (Rust backend with Python bindings) which really > > shines for larger datasets. Performance (especially read/write) is awesome, > > and the LazyFrames which optimise your query/analysis plan make a big > > difference too. > > I haven't taken enough time to explore it, but maybe Jd is the starting > > point in this space for J? > > > > > > On Mon, Jan 31, 2022 at 9:01 AM Michail L. Liarmakopoulos < > > m.l.liarm...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> Hello all, > >> > >> I find any parallels between python and J pretty interesting, being a > >> person with some python experience and an interest of the applications of > >> both python and J in mathematical modelling, analytics, computational math > >> and perhaps computational physics too. > >> > >> If you'd like to bring some features from the python math/analytics > >> libraries/ecosystem in J, I'd suggest you to look at the features of three > >> libraries: > >> > >> - numpy (I believe most features are already covered from the built in > >> features of an array language such as J) > >> > >> - pandas ( a nice library for manipulating csv files within python as > >> dataframe objects -- see the dataframes from the R language) > >> > >> - scipy (a collection of methods and functions ranging from solving > >> numerically: differential equations, evaluating definite integrals, > >> constrained and unconstrained optimization, and I believe statistics too) > >> > >> There is also out there an amazing python library for symbolic calculations > >> (like the ones you can do with Mathematica or WolframAlpha: symbolic > >> evaluation of definite and indefinite integrals, symbolic solutions of > >> diff. equations, symbolic solutions of algebraic and Diophantine equations > >> etc...). It's called sympy. > >> > >> But I'm not sure if you'd like J to include symbolic computations too or if > >> the aim of the language is to excel only in numerics, data analytics, > >> stats, whatever can be quantified pretty much. > >> > >> My few cents as food for thought. > >> > >> > >> Best regards, > >> > >> --- > >> Michail L. Liarmakopoulos, MSc > >> > >> On Sun, Jan 30, 2022, 20:39 R.E. Boss <r.e.b...@outlook.com> wrote: > >> > >>> > >>> > >>> I copied the first chapter of the book A Journey to Core Python (in > >>> > >> https://drive.google.com/file/d/1p1uIANh-LFniNNRqjDeeWWd4_-ddEZmz/view?usp=sharing > >> ) > >>> and have the question: do we want that J is competitive with Python? > >>> > >>> If the answer is yes, the next question is: what is the to do list to be > >>> competitive and how long will it take? > >>> > >>> (And then the unavoidable question: WHY?) > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> Personally I think we must aim on the niches in the market, as there are > >>> the mathematical oriented people, e.g. the broad scientific community. > >>> > >>> Then all people experienced in Excel or other spreadsheets or calculation > >>> tools. > >>> > >>> Schools and universities. Financial and statistical oriented people. > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> What we should do, IMHO, is > >>> > >>> - to emphasize the strengths of J, > >>> > >>> - to improve (considerably) the error handling of J, > >>> > >>> - to admit the steep learning curve, > >>> > >>> - to facilitate the use of mnemonics instead of primitives (I tried this > >>> afternoon the primitives.ijs for half an hour, but was not capable of use > >>> any mnemonic, not even with > >>> https://code.jsoftware.com/wiki/Primitives_to_Mnemonics) > >>> > >>> - to decide which of the features, benefits or applications (of Python) > >> we > >>> want J to have. > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> Just my 2 cents. > >>> > >>> R.E. Boss > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > >>> For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm > >>> > >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm > >> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
