This cuts across a variety of concerns -- I was noticing details which in J would be internal to the J interpreter.
This kind of thing might be worth revisiting -- perhaps if we were re-implementing J in another language, or if we were implementing a J compiler or some such. (In other words, if someone were motivated to work on a project which could take years or maybe decades to complete.) So, it's potentially useful to the right person, if only in the sense of providing a distant perspective. But probably only tangentially. -- Raul On Fri, Feb 18, 2022 at 5:50 PM Arthur Anger <[email protected]> wrote: > > Mathematicians-- > The first article referenced below mentions Iverson and APL in early pages, > but the graphic notation is definitely more complex than either APL or J. I > am not competent to judge whether some of the operations they discuss are > amenble to J implementation, or would be worthwhile. > > For those interested in notation per se, two additional references discuss > notations for quantum interactions pictorially, and in Quon, which requires > three dimensions to notate its operations. > --Art > > ATL: > http://people.csail.mit.edu/lamanda/assets/documents/LiuPOPL2022.pdf > <http://people.csail.mit.edu/lamanda/assets/documents/LiuPOPL2022.pdf> > > Mathematical picture language: > https://mathpicture.fas.harvard.edu <https://mathpicture.fas.harvard.edu/> > > Quon: > https://www.pnas.org/content/pnas/115/1/81.full.pdf > <https://www.pnas.org/content/pnas/115/1/81.full.pdf> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
