Re: [Jchat] What do programmers mean by: variable, constant, function, array, etc?

[Ian Clark]

Thanks, Yuvaraj. I reckon your 2¢ is worth at least 2 bitcoins! :-D

December 2017! That's really timely.
I recall back in the 80s a leading commentator grousing that C++ was being
used for mission-critical applications before the ANSI standard had been
fully worked out. Then I watched as machine "words" grew longer and longer,
and int had variants like a sow had piglets.

And spacecraft plowed into Mars. (In 1972 the Russians hurled literally
tons of hardware at the planet.)

And as for C%2B%2B…!! You daren't name a language these days and expect
even the name to stay still. And we all felt ASCII was safe from all that:
dear old solid "+".

> Have you considered looking into C++ Glossary … ?

Yes, I had, but every language offers its own glossary. Sometimes (like J)
more than one.
I had hoped to find a "shared" glossary, hallmarked by God – or, failing
that, the genuinely accredited proxy (…one or the other).
But every computer language begetter takes it for granted his language is
destined to be the only one on earth.

I'm apt to go back to my original plan: write separate "first-contact"
treatments for each leading language.
Henry had it right [Rich, H., *J for C Programmers*, 2004, 2007-10-03]
But mine would follow matched patterns, except for using the reader's
vocabulary.

Thus, the Python book on leaves of gold states (somewhere): "there's only
one way of doing it."
The corresponding J para would say: "There's always one more way of doing
it."

That's a lot of gold I'll need. Thank God J is terse.

On Thu, Mar 8, 2018 at 4:30 AM, Yuvaraj Athur Raghuvir <
yuvaraj@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi Ian,
>
> Have you considered looking into C++ Glossary
> http://www.stroustrup.com/glossary.html ? I enjoyed "The Annotated C++
> Reference Manual" when I was learning C++ for the first time.
>
> C++ is an established ISO standard -  latest being granted in December 2017
> as *ISO/IEC 14882
> :2017* (informally
> known as C++17 ) [1]
>
> My 2c,
> Yuvaraj
>
> [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C%2B%2B
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 6, 2018 at 4:28 AM, Ian Clark  wrote:
>
> > It's absurdly difficult to write a good "first-contact" text for J
> without
> > reference to a single accepted source of definitions like: platform,
> > program, app, script, variable, constant, function, array, string,
> > character, number …
> >
> > Is there an ISO standard for common programmer terms (in English)?
> >
> > If the answer is: legion (…my first impression) – then is there one that
> > stands out for you?
> >
> > I have an operational need for a weblink to a good clear published free
> > authoritative text. To avoid cluttering this thread, please don't offer
> > your own definitions of the above terms here (although of course I'd be
> > frightfully interested to hear them one day.)
> > --
> > 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

Re: [Jchat] What do programmers mean by: variable, constant, function, array, etc?

[Ian Clark]

That's why most people give up on chatting to anyone outside their own
little circle.
It's one response to the challenge.

And why I always felt international mathematics conferences were a waste of
time
(unless you were the invited speaker at a plenary session).
There was nobody you could talk to.

On Thu, Mar 8, 2018 at 4:50 AM, Don Guinn  wrote:

> When in grade school they called things like + and - "operators". But they
> never defined it. Then in trig thay had "functions", but they never defined
> what functions were either. Then came calculus. Differentiating and
> integrating were never given a group name or general classification. I
> think teachers thought they were functions. But obviously quite different
> from things like sin and cos. I searched several math school books looking
> for definitions. Never found any. They just started using the terms without
> definition.
>
> I asked several people the difference between function and operator and got
> nonsense answers. So for the fun of it, I googled it. Overwhelmed. The only
> definitions that make sense are those of calling things as J did like +, -,
> sin and cos "verbs" and differentials and integration "modifiers". Because
> differentials and integrals return "functions". Or in J terminology,
> "verbs".
>
> These things are concepts. I think I have an understanding of the concepts,
> but as to what to call them. Who knows? The thing is that we need to try
> many ways to describe them until one of them sticks. Maybe one of the
> descriptions will work with students or other people. But I suspect that
> few people realize that things like differentiation is really different
> from + and sin.
>
> On Wed, Mar 7, 2018 at 9:09 PM, Ian Clark  wrote:
>
> > Too right, Devon.
> >
> > And have you explored the unicode situation with minus? Not to mention pi
> > and mu.
> >
> > If programmers coded like they talk and write, planes would be dropping
> on
> > our heads from all over the sky.
> >
> > I knew folk who'd never read a manual or an article about a novel
> language.
> > And they didn't read comments in code.
> > Only the code – and then they'd try out variants, to see what worked and
> > what didn't.
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Mar 8, 2018 at 3:59 AM, Devon McCormick 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > I did once ask a fellow, knowledgable programmer if the distinction
> > between
> > > function and operator in conventional languages in fact meant "with
> which
> > > alphabet do you spell it?"
> > > If it's a plain old ASCII name, like "plus", it's a function; a symbol
> > like
> > > "+" is an operator, even if both tokens behave exactly the same.
> > > Ultimately not a particularly illuminating distinction.
> > >
> > >
> > > On Wed, Mar 7, 2018 at 10:56 PM, Ian Clark 
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > >  it does not match my understanding of how standards bodies work
> > > >
> > > > However they work, they don't seem to produce a leading answer to a
> > > leading
> > > > question.
> > > >
> > > > Before posting my appeal, I googled variants of "ISO computer
> > > terminology".
> > > > I got the impression there were over 30 ISO committees dealing with
> > > aspects
> > > > of this topic, including the vexed one of translating computer
> > manuals. I
> > > > gave up and asked this forum if anyone could recommend the leading
> > (ISO)
> > > > source of common terms, like: platform, program, etc. (…hey! – I've
> > just
> > > > reduxed my original post.)
> > > >
> > > > It seems nobody can. I might as well have asked the Freemasons their
> > > > meaning of "secret society".
> > > >
> > > > > that does not match my understanding of how language use works
> > > >
> > > > What hope is there of dialog with someone if you don't agree on basic
> > > > terms?
> > > > That's my understanding of how language use works. Or doesn't.
> > > >
> > > > Yet here I am, setting out (…yet again) to talk to non-J initiates
> > about
> > > J
> > > > – and I want to use words which I know they'll understand, like:
> > > variable,
> > > > constant, function – and I want to avoid words like noun, verb,
> > pronoun,
> > > > proverb – because that's all J mystery jargon.
> > > >
> > > > Don't I need a touchstone of definitions my reader and I will agree
> on?
> > > >
> > > > To-date I've come up with these candidates:
> > > >   (a) The Oxford Dictionary (…nowadays better than I expected it to
> be,
> > > > going by past experience)
> > > >   (b) The following site: http://techterms.com
> > > > …which is cool. Just what I was looking for. But lacks the authority
> of
> > > an
> > > > ISO standard.
> > > >
> > > > Also (…oh no!) I look up a word like: Constant –and I don't agree
> with
> > > what
> > > > it says…
> > > >   https://techterms.com/definition/constant
> > > > In the final para it seems to be describing #define, not: const (…if
> > you
> > > > know any C/C++).
> > > > Plus no mention of IMHO the chief role 

Re: [Jchat] What do programmers mean by: variable, constant, function, array, etc?

[Don Guinn]

When in grade school they called things like + and - "operators". But they
never defined it. Then in trig thay had "functions", but they never defined
what functions were either. Then came calculus. Differentiating and
integrating were never given a group name or general classification. I
think teachers thought they were functions. But obviously quite different
from things like sin and cos. I searched several math school books looking
for definitions. Never found any. They just started using the terms without
definition.

I asked several people the difference between function and operator and got
nonsense answers. So for the fun of it, I googled it. Overwhelmed. The only
definitions that make sense are those of calling things as J did like +, -,
sin and cos "verbs" and differentials and integration "modifiers". Because
differentials and integrals return "functions". Or in J terminology,
"verbs".

These things are concepts. I think I have an understanding of the concepts,
but as to what to call them. Who knows? The thing is that we need to try
many ways to describe them until one of them sticks. Maybe one of the
descriptions will work with students or other people. But I suspect that
few people realize that things like differentiation is really different
from + and sin.

On Wed, Mar 7, 2018 at 9:09 PM, Ian Clark  wrote:

> Too right, Devon.
>
> And have you explored the unicode situation with minus? Not to mention pi
> and mu.
>
> If programmers coded like they talk and write, planes would be dropping on
> our heads from all over the sky.
>
> I knew folk who'd never read a manual or an article about a novel language.
> And they didn't read comments in code.
> Only the code – and then they'd try out variants, to see what worked and
> what didn't.
>
>
> On Thu, Mar 8, 2018 at 3:59 AM, Devon McCormick 
> wrote:
>
> > I did once ask a fellow, knowledgable programmer if the distinction
> between
> > function and operator in conventional languages in fact meant "with which
> > alphabet do you spell it?"
> > If it's a plain old ASCII name, like "plus", it's a function; a symbol
> like
> > "+" is an operator, even if both tokens behave exactly the same.
> > Ultimately not a particularly illuminating distinction.
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Mar 7, 2018 at 10:56 PM, Ian Clark 
> wrote:
> >
> > > >  it does not match my understanding of how standards bodies work
> > >
> > > However they work, they don't seem to produce a leading answer to a
> > leading
> > > question.
> > >
> > > Before posting my appeal, I googled variants of "ISO computer
> > terminology".
> > > I got the impression there were over 30 ISO committees dealing with
> > aspects
> > > of this topic, including the vexed one of translating computer
> manuals. I
> > > gave up and asked this forum if anyone could recommend the leading
> (ISO)
> > > source of common terms, like: platform, program, etc. (…hey! – I've
> just
> > > reduxed my original post.)
> > >
> > > It seems nobody can. I might as well have asked the Freemasons their
> > > meaning of "secret society".
> > >
> > > > that does not match my understanding of how language use works
> > >
> > > What hope is there of dialog with someone if you don't agree on basic
> > > terms?
> > > That's my understanding of how language use works. Or doesn't.
> > >
> > > Yet here I am, setting out (…yet again) to talk to non-J initiates
> about
> > J
> > > – and I want to use words which I know they'll understand, like:
> > variable,
> > > constant, function – and I want to avoid words like noun, verb,
> pronoun,
> > > proverb – because that's all J mystery jargon.
> > >
> > > Don't I need a touchstone of definitions my reader and I will agree on?
> > >
> > > To-date I've come up with these candidates:
> > >   (a) The Oxford Dictionary (…nowadays better than I expected it to be,
> > > going by past experience)
> > >   (b) The following site: http://techterms.com
> > > …which is cool. Just what I was looking for. But lacks the authority of
> > an
> > > ISO standard.
> > >
> > > Also (…oh no!) I look up a word like: Constant –and I don't agree with
> > what
> > > it says…
> > >   https://techterms.com/definition/constant
> > > In the final para it seems to be describing #define, not: const (…if
> you
> > > know any C/C++).
> > > Plus no mention of IMHO the chief role of a "constant": to behave
> > > programatically like a variable but preclude reassignment.
> > > Thus scotching the perennial C/C++ bug:
> > > if (myconst = x) { … }
> > >
> > > Also, on the home page, "Today's Quiz Question" is garbled… not a good
> > sign
> > > for something purporting to be authoritative.
> > >
> > > Can anyone do better?
> > >
> > > …there, now I've described exactly what I'm looking for.
> > >
> > > On Tue, Mar 6, 2018 at 6:27 PM, Raul Miller 
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > I do not think that "common usage" depends on ISO standards.
> > > >
> > > > 

Re: [Jchat] What do programmers mean by: variable, constant, function, array, etc?

[Yuvaraj Athur Raghuvir]

Hi Ian,

Have you considered looking into C++ Glossary
http://www.stroustrup.com/glossary.html ? I enjoyed "The Annotated C++
Reference Manual" when I was learning C++ for the first time.

C++ is an established ISO standard -  latest being granted in December 2017
as *ISO/IEC 14882
:2017* (informally
known as C++17 ) [1]

My 2c,
Yuvaraj

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C%2B%2B


On Tue, Mar 6, 2018 at 4:28 AM, Ian Clark  wrote:

> It's absurdly difficult to write a good "first-contact" text for J without
> reference to a single accepted source of definitions like: platform,
> program, app, script, variable, constant, function, array, string,
> character, number …
>
> Is there an ISO standard for common programmer terms (in English)?
>
> If the answer is: legion (…my first impression) – then is there one that
> stands out for you?
>
> I have an operational need for a weblink to a good clear published free
> authoritative text. To avoid cluttering this thread, please don't offer
> your own definitions of the above terms here (although of course I'd be
> frightfully interested to hear them one day.)
> --
> For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
--
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm

Re: [Jchat] What do programmers mean by: variable, constant, function, array, etc?

[Ian Clark]

Too right, Devon.

And have you explored the unicode situation with minus? Not to mention pi
and mu.

If programmers coded like they talk and write, planes would be dropping on
our heads from all over the sky.

I knew folk who'd never read a manual or an article about a novel language.
And they didn't read comments in code.
Only the code – and then they'd try out variants, to see what worked and
what didn't.


On Thu, Mar 8, 2018 at 3:59 AM, Devon McCormick  wrote:

> I did once ask a fellow, knowledgable programmer if the distinction between
> function and operator in conventional languages in fact meant "with which
> alphabet do you spell it?"
> If it's a plain old ASCII name, like "plus", it's a function; a symbol like
> "+" is an operator, even if both tokens behave exactly the same.
> Ultimately not a particularly illuminating distinction.
>
>
> On Wed, Mar 7, 2018 at 10:56 PM, Ian Clark  wrote:
>
> > >  it does not match my understanding of how standards bodies work
> >
> > However they work, they don't seem to produce a leading answer to a
> leading
> > question.
> >
> > Before posting my appeal, I googled variants of "ISO computer
> terminology".
> > I got the impression there were over 30 ISO committees dealing with
> aspects
> > of this topic, including the vexed one of translating computer manuals. I
> > gave up and asked this forum if anyone could recommend the leading (ISO)
> > source of common terms, like: platform, program, etc. (…hey! – I've just
> > reduxed my original post.)
> >
> > It seems nobody can. I might as well have asked the Freemasons their
> > meaning of "secret society".
> >
> > > that does not match my understanding of how language use works
> >
> > What hope is there of dialog with someone if you don't agree on basic
> > terms?
> > That's my understanding of how language use works. Or doesn't.
> >
> > Yet here I am, setting out (…yet again) to talk to non-J initiates about
> J
> > – and I want to use words which I know they'll understand, like:
> variable,
> > constant, function – and I want to avoid words like noun, verb, pronoun,
> > proverb – because that's all J mystery jargon.
> >
> > Don't I need a touchstone of definitions my reader and I will agree on?
> >
> > To-date I've come up with these candidates:
> >   (a) The Oxford Dictionary (…nowadays better than I expected it to be,
> > going by past experience)
> >   (b) The following site: http://techterms.com
> > …which is cool. Just what I was looking for. But lacks the authority of
> an
> > ISO standard.
> >
> > Also (…oh no!) I look up a word like: Constant –and I don't agree with
> what
> > it says…
> >   https://techterms.com/definition/constant
> > In the final para it seems to be describing #define, not: const (…if you
> > know any C/C++).
> > Plus no mention of IMHO the chief role of a "constant": to behave
> > programatically like a variable but preclude reassignment.
> > Thus scotching the perennial C/C++ bug:
> > if (myconst = x) { … }
> >
> > Also, on the home page, "Today's Quiz Question" is garbled… not a good
> sign
> > for something purporting to be authoritative.
> >
> > Can anyone do better?
> >
> > …there, now I've described exactly what I'm looking for.
> >
> > On Tue, Mar 6, 2018 at 6:27 PM, Raul Miller 
> wrote:
> >
> > > I do not think that "common usage" depends on ISO standards.
> > >
> > > Or, at least, that does not match my understanding of how language use
> > > works (and, for that matter, it does not match my understanding of how
> > > standards bodies work).
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > >
> > > --
> > > Raul
> > >
> > >
> > > On Tue, Mar 6, 2018 at 11:42 AM, Ian Clark 
> > wrote:
> > > > Sorry, Joe, I want "common programmer terms" for "platform, program,
> > > etc",
> > > > i.e. terms common to all programmers, not just J-ers.
> > > >
> > > > Especially not J-ers!
> > > >
> > > > I tried looking up some of these terms in the Oxford Dictionary of
> > > English
> > > > (courtesy Apple) and I'm impressed. It seems it has authoritative but
> > > > straightforward meanings under the subheading "Computing" for all
> I've
> > > tried
> > > > .
> > > >
> > > > But I'm still hoping to hear what ISO standard people on this list
> use,
> > > or
> > > > some standards body. I'm taking the baffled silence to mean that
> nobody
> > > has
> > > > ever used such a list. The fabled precision of IT professionals
> doesn't
> > > > extend to terminology, it seems.
> > > >
> > > > Such lists exist. I've seen them – though only in German, and that
> was
> > > > decades ago. Documenters need them for the purpose of translating
> > > manuals.
> > > > Though maybe the whole thing is still woolly, like it was in my day.
> An
> > > > Arab once told me he always used the English manual because he
> couldn't
> > > > make head or tail of the Arabic one.
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, Mar 6, 2018 at 2:57 PM, Joe Bogner 

Re: [Jchat] What do programmers mean by: variable, constant, function, array, etc?

[Devon McCormick]

I did once ask a fellow, knowledgable programmer if the distinction between
function and operator in conventional languages in fact meant "with which
alphabet do you spell it?"
If it's a plain old ASCII name, like "plus", it's a function; a symbol like
"+" is an operator, even if both tokens behave exactly the same.
Ultimately not a particularly illuminating distinction.


On Wed, Mar 7, 2018 at 10:56 PM, Ian Clark  wrote:

> >  it does not match my understanding of how standards bodies work
>
> However they work, they don't seem to produce a leading answer to a leading
> question.
>
> Before posting my appeal, I googled variants of "ISO computer terminology".
> I got the impression there were over 30 ISO committees dealing with aspects
> of this topic, including the vexed one of translating computer manuals. I
> gave up and asked this forum if anyone could recommend the leading (ISO)
> source of common terms, like: platform, program, etc. (…hey! – I've just
> reduxed my original post.)
>
> It seems nobody can. I might as well have asked the Freemasons their
> meaning of "secret society".
>
> > that does not match my understanding of how language use works
>
> What hope is there of dialog with someone if you don't agree on basic
> terms?
> That's my understanding of how language use works. Or doesn't.
>
> Yet here I am, setting out (…yet again) to talk to non-J initiates about J
> – and I want to use words which I know they'll understand, like: variable,
> constant, function – and I want to avoid words like noun, verb, pronoun,
> proverb – because that's all J mystery jargon.
>
> Don't I need a touchstone of definitions my reader and I will agree on?
>
> To-date I've come up with these candidates:
>   (a) The Oxford Dictionary (…nowadays better than I expected it to be,
> going by past experience)
>   (b) The following site: http://techterms.com
> …which is cool. Just what I was looking for. But lacks the authority of an
> ISO standard.
>
> Also (…oh no!) I look up a word like: Constant –and I don't agree with what
> it says…
>   https://techterms.com/definition/constant
> In the final para it seems to be describing #define, not: const (…if you
> know any C/C++).
> Plus no mention of IMHO the chief role of a "constant": to behave
> programatically like a variable but preclude reassignment.
> Thus scotching the perennial C/C++ bug:
> if (myconst = x) { … }
>
> Also, on the home page, "Today's Quiz Question" is garbled… not a good sign
> for something purporting to be authoritative.
>
> Can anyone do better?
>
> …there, now I've described exactly what I'm looking for.
>
> On Tue, Mar 6, 2018 at 6:27 PM, Raul Miller  wrote:
>
> > I do not think that "common usage" depends on ISO standards.
> >
> > Or, at least, that does not match my understanding of how language use
> > works (and, for that matter, it does not match my understanding of how
> > standards bodies work).
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > --
> > Raul
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Mar 6, 2018 at 11:42 AM, Ian Clark 
> wrote:
> > > Sorry, Joe, I want "common programmer terms" for "platform, program,
> > etc",
> > > i.e. terms common to all programmers, not just J-ers.
> > >
> > > Especially not J-ers!
> > >
> > > I tried looking up some of these terms in the Oxford Dictionary of
> > English
> > > (courtesy Apple) and I'm impressed. It seems it has authoritative but
> > > straightforward meanings under the subheading "Computing" for all I've
> > tried
> > > .
> > >
> > > But I'm still hoping to hear what ISO standard people on this list use,
> > or
> > > some standards body. I'm taking the baffled silence to mean that nobody
> > has
> > > ever used such a list. The fabled precision of IT professionals doesn't
> > > extend to terminology, it seems.
> > >
> > > Such lists exist. I've seen them – though only in German, and that was
> > > decades ago. Documenters need them for the purpose of translating
> > manuals.
> > > Though maybe the whole thing is still woolly, like it was in my day. An
> > > Arab once told me he always used the English manual because he couldn't
> > > make head or tail of the Arabic one.
> > >
> > > On Tue, Mar 6, 2018 at 2:57 PM, Joe Bogner 
> wrote:
> > >
> > >> I went back and looked at some of the existing material
> > >>
> > >> This seems to be a good list of definitions with examples:
> > >> http://www.jsoftware.com/help/primer/contents.htm
> > >>
> > >> This text seems devoid of too many terms:
> > >> http://www.jsoftware.com/books/pdf/easyj.pdf
> > >>
> > >> Of course, I'm not reading these with "beginner eyes" so both may
> still
> > >> need to be unpacked more
> > >>
> > >> On Tue, Mar 6, 2018 at 7:28 AM, Ian Clark 
> > wrote:
> > >>
> > >> > It's absurdly difficult to write a good "first-contact" text for J
> > >> without
> > >> > reference to a single accepted source of definitions like: platform,
> > >> > program, app, 

Re: [Jchat] What do programmers mean by: variable, constant, function, array, etc?

[Ian Clark]

>  it does not match my understanding of how standards bodies work

However they work, they don't seem to produce a leading answer to a leading
question.

Before posting my appeal, I googled variants of "ISO computer terminology".
I got the impression there were over 30 ISO committees dealing with aspects
of this topic, including the vexed one of translating computer manuals. I
gave up and asked this forum if anyone could recommend the leading (ISO)
source of common terms, like: platform, program, etc. (…hey! – I've just
reduxed my original post.)

It seems nobody can. I might as well have asked the Freemasons their
meaning of "secret society".

> that does not match my understanding of how language use works

What hope is there of dialog with someone if you don't agree on basic terms?
That's my understanding of how language use works. Or doesn't.

Yet here I am, setting out (…yet again) to talk to non-J initiates about J
– and I want to use words which I know they'll understand, like: variable,
constant, function – and I want to avoid words like noun, verb, pronoun,
proverb – because that's all J mystery jargon.

Don't I need a touchstone of definitions my reader and I will agree on?

To-date I've come up with these candidates:
  (a) The Oxford Dictionary (…nowadays better than I expected it to be,
going by past experience)
  (b) The following site: http://techterms.com
…which is cool. Just what I was looking for. But lacks the authority of an
ISO standard.

Also (…oh no!) I look up a word like: Constant –and I don't agree with what
it says…
  https://techterms.com/definition/constant
In the final para it seems to be describing #define, not: const (…if you
know any C/C++).
Plus no mention of IMHO the chief role of a "constant": to behave
programatically like a variable but preclude reassignment.
Thus scotching the perennial C/C++ bug:
if (myconst = x) { … }

Also, on the home page, "Today's Quiz Question" is garbled… not a good sign
for something purporting to be authoritative.

Can anyone do better?

…there, now I've described exactly what I'm looking for.

On Tue, Mar 6, 2018 at 6:27 PM, Raul Miller  wrote:

> I do not think that "common usage" depends on ISO standards.
>
> Or, at least, that does not match my understanding of how language use
> works (and, for that matter, it does not match my understanding of how
> standards bodies work).
>
> Thanks,
>
> --
> Raul
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 6, 2018 at 11:42 AM, Ian Clark  wrote:
> > Sorry, Joe, I want "common programmer terms" for "platform, program,
> etc",
> > i.e. terms common to all programmers, not just J-ers.
> >
> > Especially not J-ers!
> >
> > I tried looking up some of these terms in the Oxford Dictionary of
> English
> > (courtesy Apple) and I'm impressed. It seems it has authoritative but
> > straightforward meanings under the subheading "Computing" for all I've
> tried
> > .
> >
> > But I'm still hoping to hear what ISO standard people on this list use,
> or
> > some standards body. I'm taking the baffled silence to mean that nobody
> has
> > ever used such a list. The fabled precision of IT professionals doesn't
> > extend to terminology, it seems.
> >
> > Such lists exist. I've seen them – though only in German, and that was
> > decades ago. Documenters need them for the purpose of translating
> manuals.
> > Though maybe the whole thing is still woolly, like it was in my day. An
> > Arab once told me he always used the English manual because he couldn't
> > make head or tail of the Arabic one.
> >
> > On Tue, Mar 6, 2018 at 2:57 PM, Joe Bogner  wrote:
> >
> >> I went back and looked at some of the existing material
> >>
> >> This seems to be a good list of definitions with examples:
> >> http://www.jsoftware.com/help/primer/contents.htm
> >>
> >> This text seems devoid of too many terms:
> >> http://www.jsoftware.com/books/pdf/easyj.pdf
> >>
> >> Of course, I'm not reading these with "beginner eyes" so both may still
> >> need to be unpacked more
> >>
> >> On Tue, Mar 6, 2018 at 7:28 AM, Ian Clark 
> wrote:
> >>
> >> > It's absurdly difficult to write a good "first-contact" text for J
> >> without
> >> > reference to a single accepted source of definitions like: platform,
> >> > program, app, script, variable, constant, function, array, string,
> >> > character, number …
> >> >
> >> > Is there an ISO standard for common programmer terms (in English)?
> >> >
> >> > If the answer is: legion (…my first impression) – then is there one
> that
> >> > stands out for you?
> >> >
> >> > I have an operational need for a weblink to a good clear published
> free
> >> > authoritative text. To avoid cluttering this thread, please don't
> offer
> >> > your own definitions of the above terms here (although of course I'd
> be
> >> > frightfully interested to hear them one day.)
> >> > 
> --
> >> > For 

Re: [Jchat] Favorite blog shows global sea level rise per decade isoclines.

[Devon McCormick]

Like Fire Island here:
https://www.google.com/maps/place/Fire+Island,+NY/@40.6999706,-73.1614613,11z/data=!3m1!4b1!4m5!3m4!1s0x89e81153da534b8f:0x63032a1963b35f70!8m2!3d40.6475997!4d-73.1459474
?

(In case gmail mangles this, search for "Fire Island" on gmaps.)

On Wed, Mar 7, 2018 at 2:33 PM, Björn Helgason  wrote:

> it has never been considerated a good idea to build on sand.
>
> On 7 Mar 2018 19:17, "David Lambert"  wrote:
>
> > https://www.wunderground.com/cat6/weaker-gulf-stream-means-t
> > rouble-coastal-new-england
> >
> > This is the cat6 wunderblog started by Jeff Masters of wunderground,
> > bought by weather.com, bought by IBM.
> >
> > Soon they'll be coding in APL & j!?
> >
> > --
> > For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
> --
> For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
>



-- 

Devon McCormick, CFA

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

Re: [Jchat] What do programmers mean by: variable, constant, function, array, etc?

[Devon McCormick]

Yes - I own a copy of that very volume, purchased for me by my friend Jim
Korn, for that purpose but the NuVoc detailed pages had enough of that idea
that I felt no need to slavishly reproduce the older example.


On Wed, Mar 7, 2018 at 8:52 PM, Ian Clark  wrote:

> Sandra Pakin, and Ray Polivka, authored a number of good introductory &
> reference books for APL.
> Thanks for reminding me, Devon.
>
> Google (bless its little cotton socks) was most helpful. There's an online
> copy of the APL\360 Reference Manual here:
>
> http://www.softwarepreservation.org/projects/apl/Books/
> APL360ReferenceManual
> It lacks the lavish typographic aids we have today, but could serve as a
> gold-standard for future work.
>
> One could simply go through it and copy its style and layout for J – or
> whatever variant "one" wishes to promote.
>
> On Wed, Mar 7, 2018 at 1:25 PM, Devon McCormick 
> wrote:
>
> > My favorite APL test was Sandra Pakin's reference manual: most APL
> > primitives were defined abstractly on one page, then examples of usage
> were
> > shown on the facing page.
> >
> > On Tue, Mar 6, 2018 at 2:52 PM, Ian Clark  wrote:
> >
> > > > So I'm not sure this helps you,
> > >
> > > Be sure it does.
> > >
> > > 1. I spent precious years receiving a stream of people who were not IT
> > > professionals, and didn't want to be, but had IT rammed down their
> > throats.
> > > To wit: wives of IBM Hursley staff, who signed up for a Human Factors
> Lab
> > > subject panel.
> > > I briefed them, measured their IQ, then sat behind 1-way glass and
> > watched
> > > them perform on a simulated IT system developed specially for HF
> > > experiments.
> > > Then I watched and edited the video, audio and keystroke logs for hours
> > > until I had their difficulties pinned out like butterflies.
> > > We published a raft of papers in IJMMS and other applied psychology
> > > journals. We got a mean reputation in those circles. We were the
> Apaches.
> > > More usefully, we showed cocksure programmers how people (…intelligent
> > > people -- we had proof of that) floundered and foundered when using
> their
> > > wonderful software. Then we helped them up off the floor and stopped
> them
> > > shooting themselves.
> > >
> > > A CIA torture chamber couldn't have done it better (we were equipped
> like
> > > one, but without the funnels and buckets of water.)
> > >
> > > It develops an attitude. Yes – I too am aware that other people tend to
> > be
> > > different from me.
> > >
> > > 2. My Gilman and Rose had a red cover. I hated the book – oversized,
> > > expensively produced pretentious twaddle. I believe it convinced a
> > > generation that everything they said about APL was true. There was
> > NOTHING
> > > about writing and maintaining a distributable app in it. NOTHING about
> > > solving meaningful problems to the vast majority of people. It was all
> > > "here's this stellar galactic language of the gods. Bow down and
> grovel."
> > >
> > > By contrast I finger APWJ (At Play With J) and Cliff Reiter's book as
> > polar
> > > opposites. Those are clear-eyed, clear-voiced books that make toast of
> > > formidable problems which actually look useful to know something about.
> > If
> > > there's one book that converted me to J, it was APWJ.
> > >
> > > (BTW they say that J-ottings is in the pipeline. I thrill to think of
> > it.)
> > >
> > > 3. Yea…h. Concrete Math had things going for it. So did the books
> > produced
> > > by the I-APL project. Alvord and Thompson. I loved Gary Helzer's
> manual.
> > I
> > > could actually engage in Joy-in-the-Law over it.
> > >
> > > (I think I've said enough.)
> > >
> > > On Tue, Mar 6, 2018 at 7:11 PM, Raul Miller 
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Eh... for me that was the J Dictionary, the J Concrete Math book and
> > > > the J Source book. But that was for me...
> > > >
> > > > (Also, before that, I'd gotten quite a lot out of the Gilman and Rose
> > > > book on APL (it had a red cover though - and when I search for it, I
> > > > find a different version with a green cover - I do not know how
> > > > significant the version differences are)).
> > > >
> > > > But also, I've learned long ago that other people tend to be
> different
> > > > from me.
> > > >
> > > > So I'm not sure this helps you,
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Raul
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, Mar 6, 2018 at 2:06 PM, Ian Clark 
> > wrote:
> > > > > Thanks, Joe.
> > > > >
> > > > > I have Introductions to J coming out my ears. And before that,
> > > > > Introductions to APL. IMFFHO they all miss the boat.
> > > > > I think at long last I can now write one which touches the button
> > for a
> > > > > bona fide J know-nothing.
> > > > >
> > > > > Arrogance? Not a bit of it. I've simply looked at what other (more
> > > > > popular/successful) language systems do.
> > > > >
> > > > > In a nutshell – what we 

Re: [Jchat] What do programmers mean by: variable, constant, function, array, etc?

[Ian Clark]

Sandra Pakin, and Ray Polivka, authored a number of good introductory &
reference books for APL.
Thanks for reminding me, Devon.

Google (bless its little cotton socks) was most helpful. There's an online
copy of the APL\360 Reference Manual here:

http://www.softwarepreservation.org/projects/apl/Books/APL360ReferenceManual
It lacks the lavish typographic aids we have today, but could serve as a
gold-standard for future work.

One could simply go through it and copy its style and layout for J – or
whatever variant "one" wishes to promote.

On Wed, Mar 7, 2018 at 1:25 PM, Devon McCormick  wrote:

> My favorite APL test was Sandra Pakin's reference manual: most APL
> primitives were defined abstractly on one page, then examples of usage were
> shown on the facing page.
>
> On Tue, Mar 6, 2018 at 2:52 PM, Ian Clark  wrote:
>
> > > So I'm not sure this helps you,
> >
> > Be sure it does.
> >
> > 1. I spent precious years receiving a stream of people who were not IT
> > professionals, and didn't want to be, but had IT rammed down their
> throats.
> > To wit: wives of IBM Hursley staff, who signed up for a Human Factors Lab
> > subject panel.
> > I briefed them, measured their IQ, then sat behind 1-way glass and
> watched
> > them perform on a simulated IT system developed specially for HF
> > experiments.
> > Then I watched and edited the video, audio and keystroke logs for hours
> > until I had their difficulties pinned out like butterflies.
> > We published a raft of papers in IJMMS and other applied psychology
> > journals. We got a mean reputation in those circles. We were the Apaches.
> > More usefully, we showed cocksure programmers how people (…intelligent
> > people -- we had proof of that) floundered and foundered when using their
> > wonderful software. Then we helped them up off the floor and stopped them
> > shooting themselves.
> >
> > A CIA torture chamber couldn't have done it better (we were equipped like
> > one, but without the funnels and buckets of water.)
> >
> > It develops an attitude. Yes – I too am aware that other people tend to
> be
> > different from me.
> >
> > 2. My Gilman and Rose had a red cover. I hated the book – oversized,
> > expensively produced pretentious twaddle. I believe it convinced a
> > generation that everything they said about APL was true. There was
> NOTHING
> > about writing and maintaining a distributable app in it. NOTHING about
> > solving meaningful problems to the vast majority of people. It was all
> > "here's this stellar galactic language of the gods. Bow down and grovel."
> >
> > By contrast I finger APWJ (At Play With J) and Cliff Reiter's book as
> polar
> > opposites. Those are clear-eyed, clear-voiced books that make toast of
> > formidable problems which actually look useful to know something about.
> If
> > there's one book that converted me to J, it was APWJ.
> >
> > (BTW they say that J-ottings is in the pipeline. I thrill to think of
> it.)
> >
> > 3. Yea…h. Concrete Math had things going for it. So did the books
> produced
> > by the I-APL project. Alvord and Thompson. I loved Gary Helzer's manual.
> I
> > could actually engage in Joy-in-the-Law over it.
> >
> > (I think I've said enough.)
> >
> > On Tue, Mar 6, 2018 at 7:11 PM, Raul Miller 
> wrote:
> >
> > > Eh... for me that was the J Dictionary, the J Concrete Math book and
> > > the J Source book. But that was for me...
> > >
> > > (Also, before that, I'd gotten quite a lot out of the Gilman and Rose
> > > book on APL (it had a red cover though - and when I search for it, I
> > > find a different version with a green cover - I do not know how
> > > significant the version differences are)).
> > >
> > > But also, I've learned long ago that other people tend to be different
> > > from me.
> > >
> > > So I'm not sure this helps you,
> > >
> > > --
> > > Raul
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Tue, Mar 6, 2018 at 2:06 PM, Ian Clark 
> wrote:
> > > > Thanks, Joe.
> > > >
> > > > I have Introductions to J coming out my ears. And before that,
> > > > Introductions to APL. IMFFHO they all miss the boat.
> > > > I think at long last I can now write one which touches the button
> for a
> > > > bona fide J know-nothing.
> > > >
> > > > Arrogance? Not a bit of it. I've simply looked at what other (more
> > > > popular/successful) language systems do.
> > > >
> > > > In a nutshell – what we don't.
> > > >
> > > > IF you have a treatment to-hand which you read when you genuinely
> knew
> > > > nothing about J
> > > > ANDIF it motivated you to invest your scarce time in engaging with
> the
> > > > language
> > > > THEN I'd like to see it.
> > > > ELSE.
> > > > * * * * *
> > > > This doesn't look good as I re-read it, I have to admit. But I'm too
> > old
> > > to
> > > > be polite if it means not being honest.
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, Mar 6, 2018 at 6:04 PM, Joe Bogner 
> > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> 

Re: [Jchat] Favorite blog shows global sea level rise per decade isoclines.

[Björn Helgason]

it has never been considerated a good idea to build on sand.

On 7 Mar 2018 19:17, "David Lambert"  wrote:

> https://www.wunderground.com/cat6/weaker-gulf-stream-means-t
> rouble-coastal-new-england
>
> This is the cat6 wunderblog started by Jeff Masters of wunderground,
> bought by weather.com, bought by IBM.
>
> Soon they'll be coding in APL & j!?
>
> --
> For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
--
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm

[Jchat] Favorite blog shows global sea level rise per decade isoclines.

[David Lambert]

https://www.wunderground.com/cat6/weaker-gulf-stream-means-trouble-coastal-new-england

This is the cat6 wunderblog started by Jeff Masters of wunderground, 
bought by weather.com, bought by IBM.


Soon they'll be coding in APL & j!?

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