Don, I appreciate your enthusiasm and agree totally on exposing children early to J. But if they happen to use another computer language I would not be disappointed. The important thing is to get them thinking analytically and critically. What does confuse me is your insistence that tacit programming in its full blown glory needs to be taught at the beginning. It just complicates things unnecessarily.
We simplify problems all the time to gain understanding. Then add complexity as after the students (by the way, we are all students) grasp the basic concepts. Do we introduce a student to Newton's law of gravity by including the friction of moving through air, the buoyancy of air, viscosity of air, how gravity varies with the distance from the earth, coriolis effects due to the earth's rotation, relativity and probably the list goes on? No. We simply spend a long time ignoring all these other components which affect acceleration and we incorrectly assume "a" is a constant, then go to "v = a*t" and finally get to "s = 0.5*a*t^2". We let the students absorb the "ideal" situations first and later throw in the other effects if they become rocket scientists. When I first started with J I struggled. I was completely baffled by tacit programming, but more important, having known APL, I was confused by differences from APL, like the way \ works in J. As far as tacit programming, I'm still learning. But to me it's a challenge. But I never saw these obstacles as something wrong with J. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
