Raul Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > But this conflicts with the final paragraph on that page. well, the final paragraph said that most languages dealt with the items of a list one at a time. my for version still deals with the items one at a time. it is not as cumbersome as the earlier solutions, but it still suffers from a serious case of DWIS instead of being DWIM. > > More specifically, most languages treat looping as an indeterminate > construct -- you start at the beginning, but then must test each time > through the loop to see if you are done yet. And that, I think, is the > point of that part of that page. > I think the item-by-item drudgery is the point of that part of the page. Even in agile languages like Python and Perl, you still are stuck with item-by-item drudgery.. actually that is not true for these languages thanks to SciPy and PDL (perl data language). In fact, I bet C++ has functionals or something to do this...hey! wait.. what language doesnt have a way to zip two lists and then apply a binary operator to them? None that I know.. Haskell can certainly do it. But I think the J concept of ranking functions is far more scaleable in the long run. But most languages have tacked on some way of handling the most common case easily. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
