Does the verb Cloak X ]: Y return a non-noun? If so, why ]: is not a conjunction?
tokens [. and ]. were previously Lev and Dex, will it be better to reserve them for the possible resurrection of Lev and Dex; and use other tokens for Trigger and Trap? Pardon me if my questions are silly. Вс, 09 мар 2014, Jose Mario Quintana писал(а): > Bill, > > These are answers to your questions in the same order: > > These are extensions, they do not change existing semantics but enhance > some of them. It is possible but improbable that they can brake existing > code. An issue could occur when code is detecting errors that are not > longer produced and taking different actions. The patches apply to the > core language, which has not changed, so it should be compatible with the > J701 engine but Thomas (who implemented the extensions, I am only the main > instigator, is on vacation now) could verify my understanding and provide > you later with more information. I do not think we have a test suite yet > but we could provide one soon. > > The main purpose of the extensions is to make the life of a tacit writer a > lot easier. Many are designed to facilitate meta-programming by aiding and > allowing the construction of permissive (wicked) tacit verbs, adverbs and > conjunctions which can take and produce any kind of words (that is, nouns, > verbs, adverbs and conjunctions); thus, they simplify tacit adverbial > writing and permits tacit conjunctional writing (which is impossible to > accomplish otherwise). > > These extensions are experimental and controversial (the official > interpreter provides the means for constructing wicked tacit verbs and > Henry has argued strongly in the past for forbidding this from happening). > They also use some current available tokens that could be reclaimed by the > official language in the future; so, the use of pro-verbs, pro-adverbs and > pro-conjunctions is advised. One can also crash the system inadvertently > (by writing nonsensical sentences involving the extensions); so, saving > often one's work is recommended). > > I hope it helps. > > > On Sun, Mar 9, 2014 at 12:06 AM, bill lam <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Will it change current J semantics or break existing code? > > If it is compatible with current J701 engine, I'll try to add > > it into android libj.so which is also GPL licensed. > > > > Is there any test suite for the extensions? Actually I don't > > understand those extensions, sorry to be slow. > > > > Сб, 08 мар 2014, Jose Mario Quintana писал(а): > > > The patches, a Windows 32-bit DLL, a cheatsheet, 32 and 64 bit Unix > > > libraries are found at: > > > > > > > > > http://www.2bestsystems.com/foundation/j/ > > > > > > > > > For more details and demonstration code, see the article in the Journal > > of > > > J: http://journalofj.com/index.php/vol-2-no-2-october-2013 (only the > > > definition of the new conjunction knot (`.) has been slightly modified > > for > > > the release). > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm > > > > -- > > regards, > > ==================================================== > > GPG key 1024D/4434BAB3 2008-08-24 > > gpg --keyserver subkeys.pgp.net --recv-keys 4434BAB3 > > gpg --keyserver subkeys.pgp.net --armor --export 4434BAB3 > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm -- regards, ==================================================== GPG key 1024D/4434BAB3 2008-08-24 gpg --keyserver subkeys.pgp.net --recv-keys 4434BAB3 gpg --keyserver subkeys.pgp.net --armor --export 4434BAB3 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
