> 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.
Well, not everything is an array. For example, + is not an array. And to distinguish we call them nouns" and verbs in J, and arrays and functions in APL. If you drop the term you are going to have to come up with another term for the concepts. ----- Original Message ----- From: PackRat <[email protected]> Date: Monday, October 25, 2010 20:10 Subject: Re: [Jgeneral] "J In A Day" --crits please To: General forum <[email protected]> > 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
