On Wed, Dec 10, 2008 at 8:40 AM, John Randall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Tracy Harms wrote: >> This article has been catching some attention. There is no mention of >> J in it, but J has come up in at least some resulting discussions. > > I can't find the discussions, but this point seems to come down to the > assumption that functional programming is lazy evaluation (which IS a good > idea), and function level programming is ignored. Mathematica can do the > latter quite well, and so can J.
Lazy evaluation potentially introduces overhead cost in each step of a process, and in some contexts can lead to hard-to-debug issues, but in some cases can make notation significantly simpler than the alternatives. Also, J does support lazy evaluation, in a minor way: ^:_ -- Raul ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
