What are the benefits of choosing APL over J if you do not know either
to begin with?

Let's not mention the ascii vs non-ascii character set (that has been
done to death by now!) or the cost, I want to know about comparisons
of what you can practically do with them and how easy it is to do
those things.

Is there a particular algorithm that anybody knows that is
significantly easier to write or which executes "better" in J than
APL?

I have never used APL but I gather from what I read that there are
more inconsistencies in the language of APL compared to J, but that
there are more libraries available for APL.



On Tue, May 26, 2009 at 11:04 AM, Morten Kromberg <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi Ian!
>
> Your subject line caught my eye... ;-) And since you're posting old news
> about Dyalog APL to the J Chat forum, I feel it is my duty to respond with
> an update (not that I want to argue with your choice of  J if it feels
> comfortable for what you are doing):
>
>> J's portability between Windows, Mac and PDA alone sees to that for me.
>
> OK, we don't have a "native" Mac version, but Dyalog APL does run on a Mac
> in a variety of different ways (Under Wine and various Virtual Machine
> frameworks). The same GUI is available on most platforms, so I think that
> your ability to produce good looking and portable user interfaces using this
> route should be no worse than using J - and could be significantly better
> depending on what you are trying to do.
>
>> Code written by people who didn't appreciate []ML<-3
>
> OK, this DOES seem like an odd reason to switch to J ;-) (for those who do
> now know, []ML<-3 puts Dyalog APL in "APL2 Compatibility Mode").
>
>> []AV's are devastatingly different
>
> True, but now that APL has "gone Unicode", []AV is just an obsolete
> 256-element character vector which is there in order to allow old code which
> references it directly to continue working. Dyalog APL now probably has the
> most complete (and "integrated") Unicode implementation of any array
> language. Unlike in J (last time I looked), a Finn can just type:
>
>      'ä'='Säppäla'
> 0 1 0 0 1 0 0
>
>> Code that needs frequent execution of B[a;b;c;d;e...]<-1 (uses lots of
> memory ... etc)
>
> These problems are now pretty much solved in Dyalog APL (SQUAD indexing has
> been added to avoid the need for execute, and indexing has been rewritten to
> be memory-efficient).
>
>> Also I don't have a spare couple of grand to keep up with the latest
>> releases of Dyalog APL and APL+Win -- but that's not the key issue
>> because I could always find a customer to buy me the products I need.
>
> A "non-commercial" Dyalog APL will set you back £50, and if you are only
> doing a small amount of infrequent commercial work, you can pick the 2%
> royalty agreement so that you have no up-front costs.
>
>> No, the key issue for me is that I've written J code in Windows,
>> including GUI code, transferred the files to the Mac, also to my HP
>> iPAQ, an easy matter because they're ASCII txt files and it's just a
>> case of moving the dongle... and the app works First Time.
>
> Using text files to store APL code is becoming a common technique with
> Dyalog APL too (and the system takes care of updating the script files when
> you edit code while debugging - so you can do development both by editing
> the scripts and using the system interactively).
>
>> I could go on and on... This was back in the last century, and things may
> have gotten better with APL since... but I doubt it's that better.
>
> This reminds me of one of my favorite quotes:
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VgGc9kruiLQ
>
> Well, I don't think it was *that* bad to begin with, but I am happy that
> some of your most important complaints seem to have been resolved. We've
> certainly been busy!
>
>> J is going to be my tool of choice.
>
> I'm not trying to argue with that, just needed to set the record straight
> (as I see it ;-) regarding some of the things you state are "wrong" with
> APL.
>
>> BTW who's seen
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_the_APL_programming_language
>
> I'd better take a look at that ... :-)
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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