This is nice but avoids the hard parts of the problem. It's easy to say that "i." is "iota", but where does "i:" fit in? In J, the "dot" and "colon" versions of a verb often have a a fitting relation, e.g. "+" is addition, "+." is logical "or", and (monadic) "+:" is "double"; analogously, "*" is times, "*." is logical "and", and (monadic) "*:" is "square". Or, how about (^ ^. ^:) as "power", "log" and "power conjunction"? The APL characters, as pretty as they are, lose these relations between concepts
On Mon, Apr 8, 2013 at 12:52 PM, William Tanksley, Jr <[email protected] > wrote: > That really is magnificent -- and I speak as someone who stopped trying to > learn APL (before J was easily available) because I found the character set > unapproachable. I could easily see myself switching to that overlay for > normal coding and reading. > > I'd like to see this developed into a coherent standard with concern for > the capabilities of different editors (I use vim and Android). > > Marc Simpson <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Personally, I think this is a neat idea and one worth pursuing. I tried > > something similar in Emacs using overlays a while back (Don might recall > > this). Examples from that experiment: > > http://0branch.com/snippets/j-symbols3.png > > http://0branch.com/snippets/j-symbols4.png > > > > -Wm > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm > -- Devon McCormick, CFA ^me^ at acm. org is my preferred e-mail ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
