As far as I can tell from common usage, what most coders mean by
"operator" are the things that are represented by symbols.  So, "+"
and "*" are operators but something called "plus" or "times" would be
a function, even if these latter were exactly substitutable for the
former.  Of course, this usage is loose and not particularly
illuminating.

On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 1:39 PM, Raul Miller <[email protected]> wrote:
> (moved to chat from general)
>
> I think that this definition sounds like it is meant to characterize
> "c-like" (or "algol-like") languages, which J probably is not.  So any
> interpretation would probably be only weakly relevant.
>
> That said, note that we have a number of interpretations open to us,
> since "function" gets such broad use in the dictionary, including
> examples such as:
>    x&o.
>    +
>    [ , '-'"_ , ]
>    ^:
>    _:
> and ^: for example has different syntax from the others.
>
> Still, we can represent functions as nouns in J (gerunds and lookup
> tables being two examples of this concept) and their use has different
> syntax from verbs, adverbs or conjunctions.
>
> So, if we took the wikipedia definition literally, we could claim that
> functions represented as nouns are J's "operators".
>
> This probably would not correspond to the intent of the authors of
> that wikipedia definition
> (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operator_(programming)), but if we find
> any contexts where that is a significant issue, it might mean that the
> wikipedia definition is wrong in that context.
>
> --
> Raul
>
> On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 12:37 PM, Tracy Harms <[email protected]> wrote:
>> The Wikipedia entry on this topic says operators are "operations which
>> differ in the calling of syntax and/or the argument passing mode from the
>> language's functions." Since there is no such special syntax in J, my
>> interpretation is that there are no operators in J.
>>
>> Tracy
>>
>> On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 11:42 AM, Raul Miller <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> If we do not know what an operator is, how can we know whether or not
>>> J has them?
>>>
>>> --
>>> Raul
>>>
>>> On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 11:39 AM, Tracy Harms <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> > My understanding is that J has no "operators" in the usual sense. The
>>> term
>>> > "operation" seems reasonable to encompass copula, verbs, adverbs, and
>>> > conjunctions.
>>> > On Sep 11, 2012 1:52 PM, "Don Guinn" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> >
>>> >> Be careful how you define operators too. + and - are commonly called
>>> >> operators.
>>> >>
>>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>> 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
^me^ at acm.
org is my
preferred e-mail
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm

Reply via email to