Hi Terrence; I just have to state that that is the first time in the decade and a half that I've been exposed to J that I've ever heard J characterized as _more_ readable than APL. I'm curious as to how you conclude that.
------------------------------------------------------------------------ |\/| Randy A MacDonald | APL: If you can say it, it's done.. (ram) |/\| [EMAIL PROTECTED] | |\ | | The only real problem with APL is that BSc(Math) UNBF'83 | it is "still ahead of its time." Sapere Aude | - Morten Kromberg Natural Born APL'er | Demo website: http://156.34.78.235/ -----------------------------------------------------(INTP)----{ gnat }- ----- Original Message ----- From: "Terrence Brannon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "General forum" <[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2007 12:42 PM Subject: [Jgeneral] New to J - Hello > On 3/28/07, Dan Bron <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Though, in retrospect, since Terrence is new to J (I assume), > > new for a second time. I keep wondering about it. It's easier to get > into than kX and kdb. It's more readable than APL. It's more terse > than haskell (I always start losing in Haskell when it gets to > monads). > > I do a lot of data crunching: I take csv, xml, fixed-width files and > commit such data to SQL databases. And sometimes spreadsheets. So, I'm > just playing with J to see what it can offer a > Perl/Python/soon-to-be-Java guy. > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
