Blank I have a challenge.
I am interested in using the J system for experiential use in elementary
and secondary school Mathematics. It has many advantages, including free
availability for education.
. However, no one would claim it is easy for teachers to learn J. What I
have done in this paper is describe a language - called S, for school - that
seems to be closer to Mathematics and needs no tacit programming form. It
should be easier to lean and more easily parallel mathematical formulae. The
idea is that S be an option sitting on top of the J system. it is described
in a paper at:
http://members.shaw.ca/dwawatson/s.doc
The description contains a lot of "why". I found that I learned J more
easily when I asked "why". I also describe in the same form why tacit
programming works the way it does. This helped when I tried to outline
procedures for turning S into J and vice-versa.
The challenge for those who know J a lot better than I do is to more
accurately describe the procedures needed. It may require restrictions in
order to work.
I apologize for not using the Wiki. My generation was not brought up to
understand instructions. Few things used to have complexity.
Thanks,
Don Watson
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
