We have a huge army of developers who are used to approach learning a new language in the way established by Brian W. Kernighan/Dennis M. Ritchie. Basically just plunge the user in the language and have them writing programs right from the beginning. Now J is different, that approach might not work quite the same. Yet because so many of us don't know better I believe we need this kind of help.
Marshall Lochbaum's synthesis is what I was looking for. Thank you Marshal! And thank you Raul and Kip getting the ball rolling! I believe it would help to have this somewhere easily accessible for all to see. Not long time ago I started work on an out-side work project. I started it in C# and SQL Server Express. While searching for something on the web, I run into information about APL and its children. I immediately stopped all work with the intent to do everything in J instead (well I would have actually preferred K because of its C similarity and reduced vocabulary but that's out of my reach at this time). I didn't expect it would take me so long to get things going in J though. I believe if I had the "kernel" that Marshall and the rest put together, I would have concentrated on learning those verbs and I would have been way into the project by now (if not finished already). But as a beginner, how do I know what I need and what I don't to solve a general computing problem (not much math and such), when all myriad of verbs are thrown at me? Linda, I agree with your observations about the vocabulary. I am already running into that problem as a beginner. Thank you all, Greg On Sat, Mar 16, 2013 at 8:42 AM, Raul Miller <[email protected]> wrote: > On Sat, Mar 16, 2013 at 9:17 AM, Linda Alvord <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Do we really need more options to explore to find the panacea for > learning > > to "speak" J? Couldn't we just make modest improvement to our best > source > > for understanding the language? > > Honestly? I think that that's not something I am in a position to > judge. Once upon a time, I did not know J. So over several years, I > tried to spend a half an hour a day learning something I did not know. > But my memories of my difficulties from that time are dim. I can tell > you whether I am happy with the information I read, but I cannot tell > you with any accuracy how other people will feel. > > Anyways, I now have a reasonably decent grasp of J's structure, but I > struggle to understand other people's issues well enough to be useful > to them -- their issues seem to me to have some differences from what > I remember my issues being. > > Note also that I have a similar set of learning issues when I am > reading other reference material (like an english dictionary, or a > spanish dictionary). Until I've a basic familiarity with the subjects > being discussed, it's hard for me to understand the thoughts being > conveyed. > > That said, I feel I would define the "meaning" of a symbol as a > reference to some large group of experiences (or, more precisely: as a > reference to how I observe some aspect of those experiences) and a > "definition" as a collection of symbols which make similar reference. > Our struggle, here, I think, has to do with conveying the experiences > so we can have an adequate basis for the definitions. > > Thanks, > > -- > Raul > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
