On Sun, Mar 30, 2014 at 8:24 PM, Dan Bron <[email protected]> wrote: > It seems to me that this change would move J in the direction of prefix > notation, and away from infix notation. >
J offers both. > If we were to do that, I'd rather take it to its logical conclusion and > simplify the syntax at the same time, and go for something like Lisp's > S-expressions (while also making boxing, per se, transparent to the > programmer). > There are parallels. Of course, if you go that way you find that you can do almost everything with a single argument except for combining things which needs two arguments. So maybe we could skip that part and come back to J? > Which is to say: I do not prefer we pursue this course. J's infix notation > is a fundamental part of its character, and is one of the things that > distinguishes it from other languages. Not to mention one of the sources > from which it draws its brevity (which is *definitely* a core part of its > character). > It's not so much a course, it's a conjunction. > Plus I believe infix acknowledges and honors the constraints of the medium > of programming: a line of text (a line! meaning the ability to move in TWO > directions). > > That said, I was pleased and impressed by the use of x&p. in your > description of the idea. > :) Thanks, -- Raul ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
