That makes sense. In fact, it makes enough sense that Stephan Herhut
has a paper coming up at APL2007 on the topic:

"Generic Programming on the Nesting Structure of Arrays"

Bob

On Sat, 2007-10-06 at 12:48 -0700, Oleg Kobchenko wrote:
> That's a good way to think about "frames of cells". Rank-3 array could 
> be vector of matrices (with "2 or "_1) and matrix of vectors (with "1 or "_2).
> 
> Oleg
> 
> 
> On Oct 6, 2007, at 15:23, Roger Hui <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 
> "A Programming Language", 1962, page 39:
> 
> Although in certain fields, such as tensor analysis, it is
> convenient to define more general arrays whose _rank_
> specifies the number of levels of structure (i.e. zero for
> a scalar, one for a vector of scalars, two for a vector
> of vectors (matrix), three for a vector of matrices, etc.),
> ...
> 
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Henry Rich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Saturday, October 6, 2007 12:04
> Subject: RE: [Jgeneral] Empty dimensions confuse me
> To: 'General forum' <[email protected]>
> 
> You can not use the normal English meaning of "array"
> to make this argument.  Array has a special meaning
> in mathematics/computer science, wherein its meaning 
> is due in no small part to its usage in APL (and J).
> 
> I realize that J can use the terms any way it wants to,
> but I suggest to you that you shouldn't depart from
> standard meanings without sufficient reason.  It is up
> to each of us to decide what is sufficient; we talk about
> it to try to establish a common terminology.
> 
> [Sometimes the Dictionary terminology is so wrong, as
> in using the term 'global assignment' for something like
> abc_xyz_ =: 5, that agreement is impossible]
> 
> 
> I would use 'noun' to mean 'array or atom' in the
> cases you mention.
> 
> Why have two words to mean the same thing?  Currently,
> 'noun' = 'array'.
> 
> So you would say "functions apply to noun arguments
> and return noun results".  That mixes two metaphors:
> 
> noun    
> verb       adverb conjunction
> array   function   operator
> 
> I would say 'verbs apply to nouns operands and produce noun
> results'.
> 
> I would never use the word 'operator' because to a
> mathematician/physicist it means a modifier, while to a
> C programmer it means a verb.
> 
> I would also be wary about calling something a 'function'
> when it can return different values on successive calls with
> the same operand.
> 
> So when I'm talking J, I would say 'verb'.
> 
> I would use 'array' to mean a noun that has dimensions, and
> 'atom' to mean a noun that does not.  'Noun' covers both cases.
> 
> 
> 
> I want 'array' to mean rank > 0 to avoid
> the clumsy 'non-atomic array'.
> 
> If "non-atomic array" is clumsy, then "array and atom"
> is no less so, and would be used much more. e.g.
> What does the monad [EMAIL PROTECTED] do?  It finds the rank
> of an array (or atom).  For that matter, what does
> the monad $ do?  Finds the shape of an array (or atom).
> 
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] finds the rank of a noun, and $ finds the shape of
> a noun.  What's hard about that?
> 
> Once you get over thinking that 'array' must include
> atoms, you can get down to the real issues:
> 
> 0) Do we need a word for 'non-atomic noun'?  I say yes.
> 
> 1) Is there a better word than 'array'?  I say no.
> 
> 2) Would people be confused by a change in terminology?  I 
> say no.
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
> 
> 
> 
>        
> ____________________________________________________________________________________
> Moody friends. Drama queens. Your life? Nope! - their life, your story. Play 
> Sims Stories at Yahoo! Games.
> http://sims.yahoo.com/  
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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