On Sat, Mar 19, 2022 at 8:34 PM Elijah Stone <[email protected]> wrote:
> I think a deprecation period would probably be a good idea.
I think we would need to complete the preceding steps before we
attempted such a thing.
Deprecation based on something which has not been implemented is bad news.
> Per the dictionary:
>
> > ": converts literal2 and literal4 to U8 encoded 1-byte char
Yes, I realized that after I hit send on that message.
> Not specified is whether literal2 is interpreted as ucs-2 or utf-16.
> Experimentally, it is utf-16.
It's my understanding that ucs-2 is a subset of utf-16.
> > ; verb each sequence
>
> I don't understand the significance of this.
Generally speaking, when you are working with text, you are working
with arbitrary length sequences. So, boxing intermediate results and
razing the boxes is a frequently used idiom.
;(# ":)each 1 2 3
122333
> > Generally speaking, if you want an unambiguous representation of your
> > data, you should use something like {{ 5!:5<'y' }} rather than ":
>
> I don't need unambiguous. I'll take non-obfuscatory. And, as mentioned,
> the behaviour of ": here is inconsistent with other primitives.
Every primitive is in some sense "inconsistent" with other primitives,
because every primitive accomplishes something different.
The ": primitive is about formatting text for display. That is going
to have to be different from an operation like addition.
> > it is not being displayed correctly.
>
> The display seems correct to me.
Ah, that was my browser / email client messing up.
Thanks,
--
Raul
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
