It's probably good to leave some pressure on developers to keep their
definitions to a comprehensible size.

That said, if you want to write such a thing, I am not going to stop you.

Thanks,

-- 
Raul

On Tue, Oct 27, 2020 at 10:36 PM Don Guinn <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Between the terseness of J and until now with DD all my definitions, except
> for nouns, would fit in the screen. But with DD definitions can easily get
> very long. The editor needs a way to hide blocks of code like editors for C
> and JavaScript can. Not now, but soon.
>
> On Tue, Oct 27, 2020, 7:20 PM Ric Sherlock <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > I have updated the J Extension for VS Code with syntax highlighting support
> > for Direct Definition.
> > https://github.com/tikkanz/j-vscode
> >
> > It differentiates between a DD noun ( {{)n .... }} ) which is highlighted
> > as a string, vs other Direct Definitions.
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Oct 27, 2020 at 3:36 PM Henry Rich <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > > 2.  I agree completely, and was planning to add this at some point after
> > > DD has been finalized.
> > >
> > > If you want to get into modifying the JE, talk to Eric. Representations
> > > are something I don't know very well - all I know is summarized in the
> > > comments I have added - so we would be on equal footing.
> > >
> > > Henry Rich
> > >
> > > On 10/26/2020 9:05 PM, Raul Miller wrote:
> > > > There are two things I would like to see for direct definition which
> > > > are not currently implemented. I do not know if these have any
> > > > roadblocks.( If they do have roadblocks, I would like to understand
> > > > these blocking issues.)
> > > >
> > > > [1]  Syntax highlighting.  Currently, jqt uses a different color for
> > > > {{ than for }} in multiline direct definitions. (jhs does not have
> > > > this issue.)
> > > >
> > > > [2] Representation. I would very much like a variant on 5!:5 which
> > > > produces a direct definition form which is analogous to linear
> > > > representation except that it uses direct definition rather than
> > > > explicit definition. (Name use conflicts could be handled by replacing
> > > > n=. with 'n'=. and replacing other uses of n with ('n'~), and of
> > > > course the same for other reserved names.)
> > > >
> > > > My primary use of this representation would be in J's default display
> > > (9!:3).
> > > >
> > > > If you think I should tackle these myself, I guess I can try (though I
> > > > suspect I would goof up on my first attempt, and I do not know where
> > > > jqt's syntax highlighting code is located).
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
> > > https://www.avg.com
> > >
> > > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > 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

Reply via email to