I have only vague memory of this implementation.

But J7 is open source, so in principle any of us could write support
for this type.

Personally, though, I'd want to have a deep understanding of the
issues that control the performance of J's memory management in the
context of boxed types before I would want to tackle "sparse boxed".

I'd also want to have in mind some good ideas of why this would be useful.

-- 
Raul

On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 12:42 PM, Devon McCormick <[email protected]> wrote:
> I'd not thought of the parts of speech as a type system before.  On the
> data types, has "sparse boxed" been (re-) implemented in J7?  It was
> present in J6 for a while, then removed.
>
>
> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 9:01 PM, Raul Miller <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> I have had my attention called to
>>
>> http://existentialtype.wordpress.com/2011/03/19/dynamic-languages-are-static-languages/
>> repeatedly, and perhaps discussions of types are interesting.
>>
>> J has two systems of types:
>>
>> J's static type system has nouns, verbs, adverbs and conjunctions (J's
>> copula might also be thought of as having static type, but copula
>> cannot be used in isolation so I will not consider them to be a part
>> of the type system).
>>
>> J's dynamic type system currently has boolean, literal, integer,
>> floating point, complex, boxed, extended integer, rational, sparse
>> boolean, sparse literal, sparse integer, sparse floating point, sparse
>> complex, sparse boxed, symbol and unicode.  Note that J's gerunds do
>> not have their own type -- they use the boxed type.
>>
>> Additionally, J's static type system is extensible in a restricted,
>> but open ended sense:  Adverbs and Conjunctions can produce any of the
>> main four static types, and this result is a part of the complete
>> static type.  In some sense, this is like a macro, or a define-syntax
>> system, it's constrained -- in essence all you can do here is obtain
>> additional arguments (beyond the "zero extra arguments" that a noun
>> result can reference).
>>
>> J's dynamic type system is not extensible, in current implementations
>> of J.  This is [arguably, but in my opinion] a good thing.
>>
>> We could imagine [for example] a facility (analogous to f.) which
>> transforms a J verb according to some static type inference system
>> which has its origins in the types supported by J's dynamic type
>> system.  Here, a constraint on dynamic type within the verb could have
>> its influence propagated to the beginning of the verb -- if at some
>> point a value must be a member of a restricted set of types, the verb
>> could refuse to run if an argument were not a member of an appropriate
>> set (thus avoiding the need to perform those tests in an iterated
>> context).  See also: http://www.chilton.com/~jimw/apl85.html
>>
>> That said, note that a type language is typically a low power language
>> with guaranteed termination semantics ("grammar"), which allows for
>> some [necessarily incomplete] early consistency tests on large
>> programs.  I do not use J to write large programs, so I do not miss
>> this kind of meta-language in J.  I mostly use J to understand
>> concepts, and I am usually only interested in concise J expressions.
>> Some other people's needs will of course be different.
>>
>> Finally, note that a key feature of J's type system is its regularity,
>> which is inspired a variety of mathematical issues.  Math, in general,
>> is not necessarily regular, but a regular
>>
>> I believe the above description is consistent with typical uses of
>> these words and phrases.  But note that strictly speaking the types
>> which I have labeled as "static" are static within an instance of an
>> expression.  This is unambiguous for tacit expressions, but explicit
>> expressions are re-parsed during execution in the current
>> implementation of J.
>>
>> FYI,
>>
>> --
>> Raul
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>> 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
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm

Reply via email to