"But I think I am
trying to tell you that your point of view does not fit very well into
my perspectives"

Yes, our perspectives are different; from mine I still do not see why the
sentence L.([ [ [ [ [ [ [)`'' (or L.([: [: [: [: [: [: [:)`'' for that
matter) should affect one's preference for [: over @: or vice versa when
programming or metaprogramming.  Anyway, I am not aware of any significant
issues related to avoiding [: ; so, I would welcome any specific instances,
illustrating your perspectives, strongly suggesting to the contrary.  As
somebody allegedly did not say "when the facts change, I change my mind."

On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 7:49 AM, Raul Miller <[email protected]> wrote:

> I believe that I don't have to "use" a fork for the fork to exist.
> (But what does "use" mean, for a symbolic expression?) So, anyways,
> the [ [ [ [ [ [ [ sequence in ([ [ [ [ [ [ [)`'' is actually three
> forks: ([ [ ([ [ ([ [ [))).
>
> On a related note, is + invoked in the sentence +/'' (or in related
> sentences)? [Or is it evoked?]
>
> Something similar to my above expressions happens with verbs used in
> special code, and with verbs passed to some adverbs and conjunctions.
> Or, for that matter, if we look at the implementation closely enough,
> for expressions like 1 2 3 + 4 5 6.  (If I recall correctly, '+' is
> just an ascii character which jtva() uses, along with information
> about rank and argument storage format, when deciding which code to
> run on its arguments).
>
> Anyways, I do not think I'm trying to tell you that you should think
> of yourself as being wrong in any absolute sense. But I think I am
> trying to tell you that your point of view does not fit very well into
> my perspectives and my ways of thinking about J. (All too often, we
> use "truth" to identify contexts, but sometimes this shorthand makes
> talking about other contexts a subtle and elusive thing.)
>
> Thanks,
>
> --
> Raul
>
> On Thu, May 16, 2013 at 5:28 PM, Jose Mario Quintana
> <[email protected]> wrote:
> > I am still somewhat confused, where is the fork then?  You are not
> > referring ( [ [ [ [ [ [ [)`'' as a fork.  Are you?  You are not
> considering
> > forks that are not invoked (such as the one in the sentence '[ [ [').
>  Are
> > you? Maybe you are, but in that case the [: vs @: argument would be mute
> > or, alternatively, I could say " A teaser cap is the exception to the
> rule,
> > [: is the only verb that is not invoked when is the leading verb in
> > a fork that is invoked" instead.  (I am afraid we might be starting to
> > split hairs though.)
> >
> >
> > On Thu, May 16, 2013 at 4:52 PM, Raul Miller <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> >
> >> All [
> >>
> >> None of the [ verbs receive any arguments.
> >>
> >> The only verb which does anything, in that sentence, is L.
> >>
> >> FYI,
> >>
> >> --
> >> Raul
> >>
> >>
> >> On Thu, May 16, 2013 at 4:20 PM, Jose Mario Quintana
> >> <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> > Which one ( L.([ [ [ [ [ [ [)`'' ) ?
> >> >
> >> > On Thu, May 16, 2013 at 3:38 PM, Raul Miller <[email protected]>
> >> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> [
> >> >>
> >> >> --
> >> >> Raul
> >> >>
> >> >> On Thu, May 16, 2013 at 2:57 PM, Jose Mario Quintana
> >> >> <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> >> > I am afraid these examples might be too deep for me.  For instance,
> >> >> > presumably in your last example there is a leading verb in a fork
> >> which
> >> >> is
> >> >> > not invoked.  If so, which one is that verb?
> >> >> >
> >> >> > On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 7:50 AM, Raul Miller <
> [email protected]>
> >> >> wrote:
> >> >> >
> >> >> >> On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 9:56 PM, Jose Mario Quintana
> >> >> >> <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> >> >> > I do not have to wonder: if there are no teasers; the remaining
> >> caps
> >> >> (if
> >> >> >> > any) are whistle-blowers.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> What is a whistle blower?
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>    L.([: [: [: [: [: [: [:)`''
> >> >> >> 7
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> > In my mind there is an important difference: this ambivalence
> of -
> >> is
> >> >> the
> >> >> >> > rule rather than the exception for primitive verbs; most of them
> >> are
> >> >> >> > ambivalent and for good reasons.  A teaser cap is the exception
> to
> >> the
> >> >> >> > rule, [: is the only verb that is not invoked when is the
> leading
> >> verb
> >> >> >> in a
> >> >> >> > fork, for no compelling reason (again, from my viewpoint).
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> That also depends on the specific instance of a fork.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>    L.([ [ [ [ [ [ [)`''
> >> >> >> 7
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> > I am also sympathetic to your point.  I did not mean to
> reignite a
> >> >> >> > controversy that has been discussed too many times.  I was just
> >> >> pointing
> >> >> >> > out some of my reasons to Linda for avoiding [: teasers since
> she
> >> has
> >> >> >> > previously expressed her own reasons for avoiding @: .  I think
> one
> >> >> >> should
> >> >> >> > adopt a style that makes oneself more comfortable and presumably
> >> more
> >> >> >> > productive: avoiding none, avoiding one but not the other, or
> even
> >> >> >> avoiding
> >> >> >> > both.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Yes, I like this reasoning.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> (I have not bothered quoting your message in full, because it's
> >> >> >> available in the archives. If we were really concerned about
> >> >> >> preserving context, every email message here would include a
> >> canonical
> >> >> >> link to its archived version.)
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> 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
> >> >>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> >> 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
> >>
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > 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

Reply via email to