Thanks Linda. Yes, there is a better explicit version than:
f=: 13 :'(#~[:(+. 1 |. (> </\)) '' ''~:])y'
Addon: tte makes heavy weather of deb, but handles deb2 a lot better, now
that you've replaced @ by a capped fork, since it breaks down the tacit
phrase into intermediate pronouns only, avoiding intermediate proverbs.
These work-pronouns can then be renamed meaningfully.
Here's my "explication" (=deconstruction?) of your deb2 ...
require 'debug/tte'
deb2 tte
3 : 0
NB. (deb2): #~ ([: (+. (1 |. (> </\))) ' ' ~: ])
] t0=: (' ') ~: y NB. fork: ' ' ~: ]
] s0=: </\ t0 NB. main: h-: ,'\'
] r0=: t0 > s0 NB. hook: > </\
] q0=: 1 |. r0 NB. fork: 1 |. (> ((</)\))
] p0=: t0 +. q0 NB. hook: +. (1 |. (> </\))
NB. atco: (+. (1 |. (> </\)))@:(' ' ~: ])
] z0=: p0 # y NB. swap: #~
NB. hook: #~ ([: (+. (1 |. (> </\))) ' ' ~: ])
:
NB. (dyad irrelevant, so I have omitted it here)
)
Now all I have to do is set up a test value of y and re-execute lines
one-by-one ...
y=: ' able baker '
] t0=: (' ') ~: y NB. Notspace
0 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0
] s0=: </\ t0
0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
] r0=: t0 > s0
0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0
] q0=: 1 |. r0 NB. LeftshiftedNotspace
0 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0
] p0=: t0 +. q0 NB. Notspace or LeftshiftedNotspace
0 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0
] z0=: p0 # y NB. KeepOnes
able baker
I've replaced the comments with suggested names on the basis of what each
line appears to do. I haven't bothered with names for s0 and r0 because the
3 lines concerned seem to be an elaborate way of turning rotate-left into
shift-left, which could have been done using (!.) as shown in
http://www.jsoftware.com/jwiki/Vocabulary/bardot#monadicfit
This lets me rewrite (deb2 tte) as follows:
debX=: monad define
Notspace=. (' ') ~: y
s0=. </\ Notspace
r0=. Notspace > s0
LeftshiftedNotspace=. 1 |. r0
or=. +.
Keep=. Notspace or LeftshiftedNotspace
Keep # y
)
... which is more in the spirit of
http://www.jsoftware.com/jwiki/Vocabulary/Unreadability .
As you see, the above is a largely automatic procedure well within the
capability of a typical beginner.
IanClark
On Mon, Jul 14, 2014 at 7:18 AM, Linda Alvord <[email protected]>
wrote:
> Here's deb without @ and &
>
> deb
> #~ (+. (1: |. (> </\)))@(' '&~:)
> deb2
> #~ ([: (+. (1 |. (> </\))) ' ' ~: ])
>
> However it seems as though there should be a better explicit version than:
> f=: 13 :'(#~[:(+. 1 |. (> </\)) '' ''~:])y'
>
> Linda
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected] [mailto:
> [email protected]] On Behalf Of Linda Alvord
> Sent: Sunday, July 13, 2014 11:43 PM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [Jprogramming] Design goals readability and writeability?
>
> I enjoyed your article:
>
> <"1 toupper"0>"0;:'alpha beta gamma'
> ┌─────┬─────┬─────┐
> │ALPHA│BETA │GAMMA│
> └─────┴─────┴─────┘
>
> Linda
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected] [mailto:
> [email protected]] On Behalf Of Ian Clark
> Sent: Sunday, July 13, 2014 9:40 PM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [Jprogramming] Design goals readability and writeability?
>
> "The alleged unreadability of J - and what to do about it"
> http://www.jsoftware.com/jwiki/Vocabulary/Unreadability
>
>
> On Sun, Jul 13, 2014 at 11:43 PM, Don Kelly <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Absolutely!!
> > J suffers from the same problem as its precurser APL- in spades.. One can
> > write very terse code because of its power. Often, 6 moths later the
> > original writer has to spend time interpreting what was written. I have
> > come up with some terse code and , more often terse code from others- all
> > of which has been put in a utility script wrapped in comments so that
> when
> > I want to use it-I do have such guidance. This is something one has to do
> > to a great extent with any programming language. It is even more
> important
> > with J tacit.
> >
> > Don Kelly
> >
> >
> > On 12/07/2014 11:44 AM, Don Guinn wrote:
> >
> >> Readability depends on a person's background. I can't read Chinese. Does
> >> that mean it's not a readable language?
> >>
> >> When writing a program or a document one must assume some level of
> >> knowledge of the reader. J tends to assume readers have a greater
> >> knowledge
> >> of mathematics than most other programming languages require.
> >>
> >> But readability is a real problem. What is usually missing from many
> >> programs, especially J tacit, is the intent of something. Say I see
> >> something like this:
> >>
> >> < @ (({. + i.@{:)@[ { ] )
> >>
> >> It would certainly help to have some idea what this is supposed to do.
> >> What
> >> its arguments are and what it returns. Documentation really helps.
> >>
> >> But J expressions can be intimidating. It has always bothered me that I
> >> could attack a FORTRAN program spanning several pages comfortably. But
> a J
> >> program of just a few lines which do exactly the same thing is hard for
> me
> >> to get into.
> >>
> >>
> >> On Sat, Jul 12, 2014 at 12:23 PM, Erling Hellenäs <
> >> [email protected]>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi all !
> >>>
> >>> Yes, maybe we should all be concerned about writing readable code
> instead
> >>> of the shortest and most cryptic code? Maybe we should also write
> >>> writeable
> >>> code? Find a way to write that allows us to get the expressions right
> the
> >>> first time?
> >>> J is more of a notation than a language? The value of a notation is
> >>> determined by clarity, but also readability? Maybe readability and
> >>> writeability, in the sense I explained above, should get higher
> priority
> >>> as
> >>> design goals for our future J?
> >>>
> >>> Cheers,
> >>>
> >>> Erling Hellenäs
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On 2014-07-12 07:40, Raul Miller wrote:
> >>>
> >>> I would not generalize to higher rank arrays without a model of why
> I'd
> >>>> be
> >>>> using them.
> >>>>
> >>>> In other words, v=: {"_1 |:~&0 2 is probably good enough.
> >>>>
> >>>> There are some interesting contradictions here - while one needs to be
> >>>> comfortable thinking mathematically to get decent performance out of a
> >>>> system, usually what we are building is a mix of instant and delayed
> >>>> gratification and we usually assume our audience has no direct
> interest
> >>>> in
> >>>> the math we are performing (indirect interest, yes - sometimes).
> >>>>
> >>>> Often I think we go overboard, and we should throw back in some
> exposure
> >>>> to
> >>>> some of the more robust concepts (especially for the kids, so they
> have
> >>>> something interesting to play with). But professional adults tend to
> be
> >>>> under a lot of time pressure, and as a result their needs often seem
> to
> >>>> be
> >>>> a mix of the very basic and the childish.
> >>>>
> >>>> Meanwhile, it seems like anything worthwhile takes time and effort.
> >>>>
> >>>> Anyways, professional software design often centers around use cases
> and
> >>>> similar models which are aimed at extracting the important concepts
> >>>> about
> >>>> what people need to get done and how they want to work. And that kind
> of
> >>>> information is what you need if you are going to properly generalize
> >>>> application code.
> >>>>
> >>>> Thanks,
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>> 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
