Consider comparing the writing of J to the writing of English. What would be in your "Strunk and White" for the writing of J?
(The Elements of Style by William Strunk, Jr and E B White is a "writing" book. Famously brief, it discusses rules for writing correctly and well.) Kip Sent from my iPad On Feb 2, 2013, at 7:38 AM, Raul Miller <[email protected]> wrote: > While I am comparing the learning of J to the learning of english: > > Do we have grammar school students learn english by asking them to > only use [insert grammatical structure here]? Why or why not? > > If so, how well does that work? > > If not, what do we do instead? > > Thanks, > > -- > Raul > > On Sat, Feb 2, 2013 at 2:13 AM, Linda Alvord <[email protected]> wrote: >> Also, this has only forks: >> >> >> >> 5!:4 <'t1' >> >> ┌─ 2 >> ┌───┼─ {. >> │ └─ [ >> ├─ $ >> │ ┌─ [: >> ──┤ ┌────┼─ ; >> │ │ └─ ] >> │ ├─ /: >> └───┤ ┌─ [: >> │ ├─ ; >> └────┤ ┌─ [: >> │ ├─ /. ─── < >> └────┤ >> │ ┌─ [: >> └──────┼─ i. >> └─ [ >> >> >> >> This has both forks and hooks: >> >> >> >> 5!:4 <'t2' >> >> ┌─ 2 >> ┌───┼─ {. >> │ └─ [ >> ├─ $ >> ──┤ ┌─ ] >> │ │ ┌─ /: >> │ ├─ & ─┴─ ; >> └───┤ >> │ ┌─ [: >> │ ├─ /. ─── < >> └─────┤ >> │ ┌─ [: >> └──────┼─ i. >> └─ [ >> >> >> >> Linda >> >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: [email protected] [mailto:programming- >> [email protected]] On Behalf Of Linda Alvord >> Sent: Saturday, February 02, 2013 2:00 AM >> To: [email protected] >> Subject: Re: [Jprogramming] inverse oblique >> >> >> >> I remember fondly how Ken loved to read the unabridged dictionary. Richness >> of the language and the derivations of the words was a joyous experience >> for him. The J language has this same richness. >> >> >> >> For students coming to the language with years of mathematical background >> in abstract algebra, calculus, differential equations and the like, they >> are ready t o jump easily to abstract combinations. >> >> >> >> I keep thinking in terms of the long time it takes high school students to >> master functional notation like f(x) and g(x). >> >> >> >> >> >> To get from t1 to t2 requires and "idiom" x u&v y ↔ (v x) u (v y) >> >> >> >> t1=: 13 :'(2{.x)$(;y)/:;</.i.x' >> >> t2=: 13 :'(2{.x)$y/:&;</.i.x' >> >> >> >> So although t1 is longer than t2, t2 is more condensed and compex. This >> is why I say easier: >> >> >> >> t1 >> >> (2 {. [) $ ([: ; ]) /: [: ; [: </. [: i. [ >> >> t2 >> >> (2 {. [) $ ] /:&; [: </. [: i. [ >> >> >> >> The condensed spacing of /:&; gives away the increased complexity of the >> second tacit version. >> >> >> >> My guess is that you would spend less time reading the dictionary to master >> >> t1 than t2. >> >> >> >> Linda >> >> >> >> -----Original Message----- wo >> >> From: <mailto:[email protected]> programming- >> [email protected] [mailto:programming- >> <mailto:[email protected]> [email protected]] On >> Behalf Of Raul Miller >> >> Sent: Friday, February 01, 2013 9:20 AM >> >> To: <mailto:[email protected]> [email protected] >> >> Subject: Re: [Jprogramming] inverse oblique >> >> >> >> How do you define "easier"? >> >> >> >> In my opinion, it's easier to go from simple (fewer tokens) to complex >> (more tokens), but also someone has to write the code to do the >> transformation and until that's been done even this concept of "easier" can >> be indistinguishable from "can't be done". >> >> >> >> -- >> >> Raul >> >> >> >> On Fri, Feb 1, 2013 at 5:05 AM, Linda Alvord < >> <mailto:[email protected]> [email protected]> >> >> wrote: >> >>> If t1 is easy tacit and t2 is advanced tacit, wouldn't it be easier >> >>> for J to figure t2 from t1 than it is for me? >> >> >>> t=: 5 7 2 ?@$ 1e6 >> >>> s=: $t >> >>> x=: </.t >> >>> t1=: 13 :'(2{.x)$(;y)/:;</.i.x' >> >>> t-:s f x >> >>> 1 >> >>> t2=: 13 :'(2{.x)$y/:&;</.i.x' >> >>> t-:s g x >> >>> 1 >> >>> t1 >> >>> (2 {. [) $ ([: ; ]) /: [: ; [: </. [: i. [ >> >>> t2 >> >>> (2 {. [) $ ] /:&; [: </. [: i. [ >> >> >>> Or is that just wishful thinking? >> >> >>> Linda >> >> >> >>> -----Original Message----- >> >>> From: <mailto:[email protected]> programming- >> [email protected] >> >>> [ <mailto:[email protected]> mailto:programming- >> [email protected]] On Behalf Of Roger >> >>> Hui >> >>> Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2013 1:49 PM >> >>> To: Programming forum >> >>> Subject: Re: [Jprogramming] inverse oblique >> >> >>> t -: (2{.s) $ x /:&; </.i.s >> >>> 1 >> >> >> >> >>> On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 10:47 AM, Roger Hui >> >>> < <mailto:[email protected]> [email protected]>wrote: >> >> >>>> t=: 5 7 2 ?@$ 1e6 >> >>>> s=: $t >> >>>> x=: </.t >> >> >>>> t -: (2{.s) $ (;x)/:;</.i.s >> >>>> 1 >> >> >> >> >>>> On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 10:28 AM, Raul Miller >> >>> < <mailto:[email protected]> [email protected]>wrote: >> >> >>>>> Let's start with an arbitrary array: >> >> >>>>> A=: i. 2 3 >> >> >>>>> We can box oblique lines from this array: >> >> >>>>> </. A >> >>>>> +-+---+---+-+ >> >>>>> |0|1 3|2 4|5| >> >>>>> +-+---+---+-+ >> >> >>>>> However, the interpreter does not currently provide us with an >> >>>>> inverse for this operation: >> >> >>>>> </.inv </. A >> >>>>> |domain error >> >> >>>>> One problem is that you cannot uniquely determine the first two >> >>>>> elements of the shape of the original array by inspecting </.'s >> >>>>> result: >> >> >>>>> (</. 5 7$0) -: </.7 5$0 >> >>>>> 1 >> >> >>>>> If its shape is provided, how might we reconstruct the original array? >> >> >>>>> [For the sake of simple code, it's ok to focus on numeric, rank 2 >> >>>>> arrays.] >> >> >>>>> -- >> >>>>> Raul >> >>>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >>>>> - >> >>>>> - For information about J forums see >> >>>>> <http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm> >> http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm >> >> >> >> >>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >>> For information about J forums see <http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm> >> http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm >> >> >>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >>> For information about J forums see <http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm> >> http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm >> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> For information about J forums see <http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm> >> http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm >> >> >> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> For information about J forums see <http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm> >> http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm >> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
