Roger wrote:
>  a. I disagree that the functions in questions should be niladic.

I agree.  Though there are other ways to interpret the phrase 
"should-be-niladic" (which don't involve admitting zero-argument verbs into the 
language).

>  it is better to be strict now than to be 
>  sorry about being lax later.

Fair enough.  Can you sketch an example (or two) where permitting an arbitrary 
argument to such a function would cause us to be sorry later?  And, out of 
historical interest, what prompted the change when it occured?

-Dan

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm

Reply via email to