I suspect that a redex representation of J's grammar would not be very descriptive.
I think you would need an adequate dependent type system to fully specify the syntactic types of the results of J's adverbs and conjunctions. Still... you could specify an informative subset of J's grammar in redex, by [falsely] assuming that adverbs and conjunctions always produce verbs. I hope this helps, -- Raul On Thu, Oct 1, 2020 at 4:52 PM Devon McCormick <[email protected]> wrote: > > I recently butted in to a PL (programming languages) discussion on Disqus - > https://disqus.com/home/discussion/sigplan-pl-perspectives/pl_notation_is_a_barrier_to_entry/#comment-5091883057 > - where I moaned about the lack of inclusion of array languages in the PL > discussion. > > The writer of the blog entry "PL Notation is a Barrier to Entry" responded > with some examples of PL notations to look at: Ott (which I could not > find), K (same K we know?), and Redex about which there is info here > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ktNrRSAjyzQ and here > https://dvanhorn.github.io/redex-aam-tutorial/. > > Since Redex looks a lot like BNF (Backus-Naur Form), I'm guessing it may > also be inadequate for describing languages like J but I would like to hear > the opinion of someone more knowledgeable than me about this. > > Roger referred me to Appendix C of his and Morten's recently released "APL > since 1978" paper (https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3386319) where they > describe a parser model using APL. This is an example of using APL to > describe a PL. I would be interested in seeing a language like C described > this way. Does anyone have an example like this? > > -- > > Devon McCormick, CFA > > Quantitative Consultant > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
