Henry Rich wrote:
> ... And the distinction between scalar and array is important enough
> to have words for. ...
> I just don't see why the word 'array', which in plain English
> denotes an arrangement of (multiple) things, should have to include
> scalars. Sue me. Or change the standard.
Since *everything* is an "array" [1 below], the word doesn't carry much
value for distinguishing things in terms of definitions and should
probably be dropped except in reference to the "big picture" structure
of data.
That's also related to why I far prefer J's "common English"
terminology for easily distinguishing ranks:
0 atom
1 list
2 table
3..k report (of rank k)
rather than APL's "technical English" terms scalar, vector, and matrix.
Harvey
[1] sort of like all real numbers can be expressed in terms of a power
of 10, where the positive exponents can range from 0 to k
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
