Hi Kip,
There it is - what I have been looking for since I first started using
J. You quoted Roger as follows:
"If @: were replaced by the equivalent special fork [: f g , then a
sentence can be written as an unbroken . . . sequence of forks."
That sentence suggests that tacit J follows a rule that is simple
and elegant. It also means, as far as I can tell, that the documentation
should not be teaching people to use "@:", the clumsiness of which
caused me to rebel against it. You also can't follow one elegant rule of
a sequence of forks if you include hooks - leave them out - you don't
need them.
One of my problems with J documentation has been the fact that it
doesn't often tell you "why". It just tells you "what" and "how".
There may be those who can learn without ever wanting to know why, but
every little child asks "Why?". Many of us continue to do so throughout
our life.
That sentence should be first and foremost in large letters at the
beginning of the introduction to tacit J. The examples should be written to
emphasize the elegance of tacit J as a sequence of forks - without "@:"
or hooks.
I can now learn and use tacit J - which means, thank goodness that
I won't have to use explicit J, which I hate. But if you want more people
to use tacit J - do something about the documentation.
Thank you and goodbye,
Don
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
