While discussing APL and J on IRC, I discovered a weird behavioural
difference. Is GNU APL doing the right thing here?
* 10 10 10 ⊤ 125 46 789*
┏→┓
↓1 0 7┃
┃2 4 8┃
┃5 6 9┃
┗━┛
I'd expect to get the result that I'm getting by applying ⍉ to the result,
in other words, I'd expect the fo
Just a thought... What if --safe took an argument, like "--save 1",
"--safe 2", etc.
On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 10:52 AM, Elias Mårtenson wrote:
> Very good points, thank you. You articulated my own concerns as I tried to
> quantify the requirements, and what the risks are.
>
> The central need
Very good points, thank you. You articulated my own concerns as I tried to
quantify the requirements, and what the risks are.
The central need here is the ability to compute formulas that are not
entirely under your own control. In my case, I want to provide the ability
to evaluate APL expressions
Hi Elias,
I understand and to some extent support the desire to make the
safe mode more safe. However, we should not go too far
with it because
that has the risk of making --safe so restrictive that useful
operations are no linger possible.
For exa
i did an irc bot in fpc and you get all the users inputs as strings to parse so
i just made a matrix of things that i wanted to allow being done as user input
(basically new things i implemented were added as i programmed) - so a block
all then allow parse
you shouldn't be directly executing u
On 29 Mar 2017 22:35, wrote:
Are you doing this on your own irc server or in a 'freenode' type public
channel?
Why not start by setting this up in a chroot 'jail' and in a vm :)
I am, actually. But that is no reason to give unfettered access to even a
constrained system.
Regards,
Elias
Are you doing this on your own irc server or in a 'freenode' type public
channel?
Why not start by setting this up in a chroot 'jail' and in a vm :)
On Wed, 29 Mar 2017 12:21:29 +0800
Elias Mårtenson wrote:
> I'm implementing an IRC bot that can run arbitrary APL expressions. Since
> thi
Hi Elias,
thanks, fixed in SVN *914*.
/// Jürgen
On 03/29/2017 07:29 AM, Elias Mårtenson wrote:
When displaying an index error, the error message doesn't take ⎕IO
into account.
To reproduce:
*
*
* x ← ⍳10*
* x[0]*
INDEX ERROR+
x[0]
^^
* )more*
⎕IO=1 offending index=-1 max ind
On 29 March 2017 at 06:39, Christian Robert wrote:
> what is the meaning of "no native functions" ?
See info apl -n 'Section 3.9':
> A Native Function is a function that can be called in APL like a normal
> user defined APL function, but is implemented in C++.
>A native function is created wit
