J does follow the rules.  It will follow improvements
to the rules as the design and/or implementation improve.
What it will not do is to deliberately give a poorer
result than what it knows.  The best result for
$ 5 +"1 (0 1$' ')  is 0 1.  The interpreter will not
give a poorer result for it just to "keep up" with
$ 5 plus"1 (0 1$' ').



----- Original Message -----
From: Henry Rich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wednesday, July 5, 2006 8:24 pm
Subject: RE: [Jbeta] Incorrect result shape from  5 +"1 (0 1 $' ')

> I want my program to depend on J's following the rules.
> Most of the problems I have had come from boxed nulls rather
> than character, but the point is the same: if you don't follow
> the rules, how am I supposed to write working code?  Do I have
> to check the result of every expression to see if you have
> decided to add 'knowledge' to the interpreter that changes
> a result?
> 
> You seem to be arguing that if an expression is unusual
> enough I should be willing to accept whatever result you
> find convenient.  It's as if you told me that
> 3.3428953286 + 2.645451867 was implemented to be 6.0 .
> It probably wouldn't hurt me, but I would think it
> arbitrary and unjustified.
> 
> Changing the interpreter to follow the rules is fine; changing
> it to deviate from the rules is abominable.
> 
> I don't think anything in the interpreter now causes spurious
> trading.  I hope that condition persists.  And if not - well,
> maybe the stock will go up.
> 
> Henry Rich
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of R&S HUI
> > Sent: Wednesday, July 05, 2006 11:06 PM
> > To: Beta forum
> > Subject: Re: [Jbeta] Incorrect result shape from 5 +"1 (0 1 $' ')
> > 
> > What you are arguing for is that  
> > $ 5 +"1 (0 1$' ') should be 0  but that 
> > $ 5 +"1 (0 1$0  ) should be 0 1 .
> > Is that really what you want your stock 
> > trading program to depend on?


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

Reply via email to