Hello Raul;
That APL source code is in a hard-to-extract format, a workspace, seems
to me a red herring. The symbols shoehorned into the ANSI characters of
text-mode DOS were no big deal either: I still think of "square root"
as "rho" and "gamma" as "iota"
Raul Miller wrote:
On Dec 20, 2007 12:51 AM, dly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Sorry, I thought this thread was about readability - composition is
quite another matter - so write once read never.
This thread is about readability.
But we side-tracked onto the purpose of some of J's design
choices.
Also, J is more readable than APL for most people, for the simple
reason that they do not have the requisite software installed to
be able to read APL workspaces.
Finally, I totally disagree with your implication that J is a "read
never" language.
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
|\/| Randy A MacDonald | APL: If you can say it, it's done.. (ram)
|/\| ramacd <at> nbnet.nb.ca |
|\ | | The only real problem with APL is that
BSc(Math) UNBF'83 | it is "still ahead of its time."
Sapere Aude | - Morten Kromberg
Natural Born APL'er |
-----------------------------------------------------(INTP)----{ gnat }-
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
