That's a purpose, or at least a justification for its inclusion. But it still would need to be documented in nuvoc. Perhaps every keyword should have a sentence (or table entry) describing the purpose of its corresponding keyword value?
-- Raul On Thu, Jan 19, 2023 at 11:34 AM Henry Rich <[email protected]> wrote: > > The purpose of having the value is that it can be computed. And the > value might be non-boolean. > > Henry Rich > > On 1/19/2023 11:30 AM, Raul Miller wrote: > > Hmm... > > > > (1) It sounds like the 'keyword value' value is never necessary, since > > providing or omitting the associated keyword would achieve the same > > effect, > > > > (2) The purpose of this 'keyword value' value is not documented in > > nuvoc, which sort of emphasizes that it was not necessary. > > > > In my experience, if a small change to the code makes the code easier > > to document, that change would be a worthwhile effort. > > > > Or: if it doesn't make sense to document the purpose of the 'value' > > value, it should probably be removed from the implementation. > > > > Thanks, > > > > -- > > Raul > > > > > > On Thu, Jan 19, 2023 at 10:13 AM Henry Rich <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Yes. Positional parameters don't have keywords; they are so important > >> that they are recognized from their position. Keyword parameters have a > >> name and a value, and that value can be defaulted. Future keywords will > >> work this way too. > >> > >> Elijah & I argued at length about this. He wanted everything to be > >> keywords; I thought that for often-used stuff the user would forget the > >> keyword but would perhaps remember that threadpool comes first. I'm not > >> sure whether this thread is evidence favoring either position. > >> > >> Henry Rich > >> > >> On 1/19/2023 9:37 AM, Raul Miller wrote: > >>> But what about the 'value' parameter? > >>> > >>> Is it the case that the value parameter for the 'worker' keyword is a > >>> switch which (if zero) would makes t. behave as if the 'worker' > >>> keyword was p,otted > >>> > >>> If so, is this also likely to be the case for future keywords? > >>> > >>> Thanks, > >>> > >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> 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
