Each atom of a boxed array can be any of the four types of a noun. I think
the wording is to cover that case.
On Apr 23, 2012 11:03 AM, "km" <[email protected]> wrote:

> From the Dictionary II.A. Nouns, "The atoms of any array must belong to a
> single class: numeric, literal, symbol, or boxed."
>
> How about saying the type of a noun is numeric, literal, symbol, or boxed.
>  Leave it at that.
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
>
> On Apr 23, 2012, at 8:24 AM, Raul Miller <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > "Type" has been an ill-defined term in the context of J.
> >
> > But it's a popular word, for describing some aspects of computer
> > programs, and a short word.  So it probably deserves some use.
> >
> > And, I think, in the context of J, it should signify a thing that can
> > go inside parenthesis.  That concept needs a name, and I think "type"
> > fits it rather well.
> >
> > Thus, we have system types: (1)(+)(1)
> >
> > We have named types:  (smoutput)(ARGV)
> >
> > We have anonymous types:  (+/%#) (i.9)
> >
> > We have types of nouns, types of verbs and so on.
> >
> > We have numeric types, textual types, list types (and these can
> > overlap), and so on.
> >
> > etc.
> >
> > Now, one thing that this loses is the idea of a type as a
> > collection... or does it?  (1 2 3 4)
> >
> > No, what this loses is the idea of a type as a representation of
> > possibilities... or does it?  ? bind 100
> >
> > No, what this loses is the idea of a type as a storage format.  But
> > when I have proposed the idea that "type" represents a storage format,
> > I have been told that that's silly, by people who would be in a
> > position to know.
> >
> > Another concept of a type is that it represents a "domain", but that
> > has a similar lack of acceptance from people that deal with types on a
> > regular basis.
> >
> > Anyways, if my proposal here has any flaws, I think it's that this
> > definition of "type" might be too restrictive for some people.  But I
> > think that that is ok -- you can use another language if you want to
> > use a different concept of type.
> >
> > Comments?
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > --
> > Raul
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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