Graham and Philip. When an engineering problem is solved on time comes a request to destroy the solution. Don't do it. Refuse! It is bad economy. Do some explaining and commenting, and make simplifications and improvements on the code, but don't translate it into an inferior language. Two versions of the same program doubles the maintenance cost. You may be forced to find something else to do for a living, but it is better to the soul to leave a good solution than to stick to a bad solution. I don' know why clients always want to destroy good solutions, but experience tells me that they do. - Bo
>Til: programm...@jsoftware.com >Cc: Graham Parkhouse <graham.parkho...@ntlworld.com> >Sendt: 10:49 fredag den 7. december 2012 >Emne: Re: [Jprogramming] J v Python > >Graham, > > > >My experience is very similar to yours: J is excellent for solving engineering >problems on time, but then comes a request to repackage the tool into >something that non-J users can use more easily (Python if you are lucky, Excel >if you are not so fortunate, Shell if you are allowed to be pragamatic - and >which is the only one I actually get round to doing). > > > >Ideally, I would want to be able to embed J code into other more mainstream >languages (python, Lisp, Ada...) at a reasonably low level of granularity, >more or less in the same way that inline assembler is used. Or if it really >has to be done through sockets in the meanwhile, it woudld be nice to have >standard interfaces on the calling side. > > > >Philip > > > > >> Message du 07/12/12 00:42 >> De : "Graham Parkhouse" >> A : programm...@jsoftware.com >> Copie à : >> Objet : Re: [Jprogramming] J v Python >> >> Mike, that's very interesting! I (aka Eve) have currently solved 160 out of >> 404 of the Project Euler problems, using APL then J, and my recent progress >> has been heavy going, so much so that I have practically given up. My last >> efforts were on Problem 376 in April of this year, a delightful problem that >> I failed to solve, disagreeing on the answer given to the mini test problem, >> which disheartened me. I haven't tackled any of the problems you mention. >> >> But my interest in Python is for engineering software, not for Project >> Euler. I just used a Project Euler problem as an example. This year I >> developed an engineering package in J, paid for by a client. It was done >> with considerable urgency to meet a need. Now it has been done the client >> wishes it was written in Python because he doesn't believe anyone will be >> able to understand J and he already has some engineers writing elementary >> engineering software in Python. Of course, I could only have done what I did >> using J -- one reason being I'm not adept in any other language -- but it >> was perfect for this particular job because I learned about the problem I >> was trying to solve as I developed the J software. J helped me to understand >> the problem. >> >> But my illustration of J v Python was given to demonstrate my client's >> dilemma. Today a colleague in the client's office who saw the comparison >> commended me for my programming style, and he was not referring to the J >> code! Of course he knew he was rubbing me up the wrong way! >> >> For me one of the great things about J is being able to develop code by >> trial and error. I'm not good enough to get more than very small amounts of >> code right the first time. But with J you can choose to make your functions >> small and you can test them until you get them right, using a lot of thought >> and minimal key strokes. When you put the functions together, since each is >> functioning correctly, errors in the glue are easy to fix. This way I was >> able to get a pretty sophisticated system to work satisfactorily without >> visible setbacks: progress was steady to the end. >> >> There was no GUI. The system was run in an ijx window using a command >> language that is pure J. The syntax of J is perfect for this. There was no >> user interface. >> >> So 'apparent readability' is my problem. Having written a masterpiece my >> paymasters complain that they can't read it. I may begin translating it into >> Python as a PR exercise. I wonder how many times longer the source code >> would be. >> >> Graham >> > >---------------------------------------------------------------------- >For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
