Hi, Alan,
It's very late into night here in East of the Earth. I'd answer shortly.
While your concern reads reasonable to me, and some authors of Smalltalk
dialects such as Smalltalk/X even not permit any code except ascii ones,
there is some goodness in trying to programming natively and then define
language alias for cross culture interexchange. That is men do it natively,
machines do the translation.
Have those said, however, I'm fond of native J code since they do not depend
on any Human Language.
So in time I'll be coding directly in J while I getting more confidence.
Though, I may also find it even more interesting coding in Chinese, which
unfortunately is less understandable to other people. Since Chinese tastes
differently. Translate the code into J is fundamental since otherwise the
code won't run so there can be any damage to others as I could see. You may
think I would better write code comment in English, yes, and the Chinese
comments in my example is just for show the translator features. And if any
code would go under a public license, I agree English still is the choice
today.
On the other hand, most local people who can afford to go to school often
spend life time learning English but never get it done here in China. I
think that could be a huge waste of time. I myself love different cultures
and learned Japanese, English and Esperanto when I was young. Now I'm
finding myself reading more and write less in foreign languages if ever and
most other local Chinese people will never speak a single word after years
of very hard learning.
Best Regards,
Jim
Alan K. Stebbens wrote:
>
> Emptist,
>
> I'm glad that you are satisfying your need to an easier path to
> productivity in your native language.
>
> If this is your only requirement, then on that basis, your work is
> fine, and I'm guessing that you are sharing because you think there
> are others who need to read (and think) in Chinese in order to write
> and use J?
>
> While your work is admirable from a purely technical point of view,
> it's actually a step backwards in part of the broader view of what
> programming is about: sharing algorithms.
>
> IMHO, there are two reasons to write readable programs -- to help you
> get things done more easily later, or to help others get things done
> later.
>
> If your sole concern is yourself, or those few people who read Chinese
> AND can read and parse J, then perhaps this work is useful.
>
> If you have any concern for others being able to read and understand
> your algorithms, as you have expressed them, then it really becomes
> important to use a common language -- that of J expressed in ASCII.
>
> J is hard enough to parse, even for J-ers, and comprehend, as it is in
> ASCII. But it becomes even more obscure for much of the world if you
> write J in Chinese.
>
> If you contribute an interesting algorithm and it is written in J/
> ASCII then more people will be able to read, comprehend, appreciate,
> and perhaps use that algorithm than if you write it in J/Chinese.
>
> I realize that the number of people speaking Chinese in the world is a
> very, very large number, but it is not quite the international
> language that English currently is. Of course, this may change, and
> perhaps someday, my descendants may be speaking one of the Chinese
> dialects, and perhaps writing the common Chinese language. But,
> until that day arrives, if you have any belief that your algorithms
> have a life of utility for others, then you should reconsider
> expressing them in Chinese -- unless you do not care if they are ever
> useful to others.
>
> Alan
>
> PS: Just so you don't think that I do not appreciate other human
> languages, I have studied and speak with varying degrees of fluency
> Spanish, Russian, and Japanese. I even studied a semester of Chinese
> to better learn the origins of Japanese kanji.
>
> para mí, el lenguaje es una ventana a la cultura
>
>
> On Sep 14, 2009, at 8:48 AM, emptist wrote:
>
>>
>> Hi,
>> Those are defined in a class instance viriable as dictionary named 字
>> 典, which
>> will ask for exact J translation when a word is absent and then add
>> the one
>> from user answer.
>>
>> Now as to 首行 and 末列, those are splitted first and then each
>> try to find
>> itself in dictionary.
>> I'm using the following entries to define (might be on fly):
>>
>> 行
>> 加一 >:
>> 列 "1
>> 首 {.
>> 末 {:
>> 試讀四八數據檔 _8]\ _2(3!:4) 1!:1
>> 均 (+/%#)
>> 求均 +/%#
>> 增 >:
>> : :
>> = =
>>
>> so, 行 is in fact a empty string, as you've guessed it.
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
>
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/finally%2C-I%27ve-made-tiny-Smalltalk-program-for-ChineseJ-tp25435672s24193p25440731.html
Sent from the J Chat mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
