My first reaction here was "good point".

And, then, after a few seconds, I thought of Forth as an example of a
"scalar language" which let's you work with unnamed memory.

Thanks,

-- 
Raul


On Sun, Oct 2, 2016 at 12:45 PM, Don Guinn <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
> No it's not, but scalar thinking lets people get sloppy on keeping
> dependencies well defined. Thinking in arrays forces one to handle
> dependencies properly. Notice I said
>
> "thinking", not "programming".
> In programming languages like C a name once created and memory location
> are synonymous. So the issue of non-mutable arrays and non-mutable names
> are synonymous. In J they are not.
>
>
> On Oct 2, 2016 8:29 AM, "Raul Miller" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> I don't think that scalar languages vs. array languages is the issue, here.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> --
>> Raul
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Oct 2, 2016 at 9:32 AM, Don Guinn <[email protected]> wrote:
>> > Scalar languages have a need for non-mutable arrays. Array languages do
>> > not. As Bill said, all arrays in J are non-mutable. But names are not.
>> As I
>> > understand it, the in-place operations are allowed only for actions that
>> > cannot fail part-way through leaving an array half-modified.
>> >
>> > On Sun, Oct 2, 2016 at 5:13 AM, bill lam <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >
>> >> I think other forum members should have answer your question,
>> >> All J array are non-mutable. eg, an array 0 1 2 cannot becomes
>> >> 0 1 2 3 or 0 1. But value assigned to a name can change.
>> >> If you meant a name can only be assigned a value once, it was
>> >> called "given name" in ancient J, and was dropped long time ago.
>> >> I might not recall correctly, that was 2 or 3 decades ago.
>> >>
>> >> In-place operation is an implementation detail not a language
>> >> feature.
>> >>
>> >> Вс, 02 окт 2016, Erling Hellenäs написал(а):
>> >> > No - I wish I knew somewhere this is clearly described. What I think
>> is
>> >> that
>> >> > in functional languages with non-mutable data we can avoid locking.
>> >> > Non-mutable data simplifies parallelization since the objects we work
>> on
>> >> > never change. It enables massive parallelization without any locking
>> >> > schemes, I think. I hope someone in the forum can describe this
>> better or
>> >> > link to some nice description. /Erling
>> >> >
>> >> > On 2016-10-01 23:28, Henry Rich wrote:
>> >> > > It sounds like you are conflating 'mutex' and 'mutable'.
>> >> > >
>> >> > > Henry Rich
>> >> > >
>> >> > > On 10/1/2016 4:15 PM, Erling Hellenäs wrote:
>> >> > > > I think non-mutable data is part of the solution to the locking
>> >> > > > problems in object-oriented languages. It seems there must be a
>> >> > > > limit after which even J has to use more than one thread? Is
>> there a
>> >> > > > plan for how to handle that? Or are we using several threads
>> >> > > > already? /Erling
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > > On 2016-10-01 21:56, Erling Hellenäs wrote:
>> >> > > > > On 2016-10-01 15:40, 'Pascal Jasmin' via Programming wrote:
>> >> > > > > > Forcing immutable only arrays is not an option for this
>> >> > > > > > language if it is to remain compatible with itself
>> >> > > > >
>> >> > > > > Someone wants to give a more specific explanation to this? What
>> >> > > > > in the language prevents immutable only arrays?
>> >> > > > >
>> >> > > > > /Erling
>> >> > > > >
>> >> > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------
>> >> ----------
>> >> > > > > 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/forum
>> s.htm
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > ------------------------------------------------------------
>> ----------
>> >> > For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forum
>> s.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
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>> 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