Correct alignment of display of boxed symbol is rather
troublesome and need some kludges, I suspect it may 
never get done since it does not worth the trouble.

symbol, like box, acts as a container which can confuse new
users. It is ok to leave it alone.

Чт, 06 окт 2016, robert therriault написал(а):
> Hi Bill and thanks for the feedback,
> 
> I boxed the array of symbols more as a test that the box would be drawn in 
> the proper place. Getting the boxes into the right position when unicode and 
> unicode4 characters occur has been one of the ongoing challenges to this 
> process. If the array of symbols was unboxed then the result would look very 
> similar to the display of i. 4 3 right at the beginning, except of course the 
> entries would be symbols instead of integers.
> 
> Your suggestion of identifying the string type is an interesting one. Is that 
> something that would be of use when using symbols? I think that it could be 
> done by using 5 s: <'identifier' as follows then packaging the info into the 
> tooltips.
> 
>     3!:0 each 5 s: s:< 9 u: 'a'
> ┌─┐
> │2│
> └─┘
>    3!:0 each 5 s: s:< 9 u: 'ఠ'
> ┌──────┐
> │131072│
> └──────┘
>    3!:0 each 5 s: s:< 9 u: '😀'
> ┌──────┐
> │262144│
> └──────┘
>    
>  I wonder if there may be confusion over the type of the entry, which is 
> symbol, and the type of the label which could be literal, unicode or 
> unicode4. Do you have any thoughts on the usefulness of this information 
> versus the confusion of having more than one type associated with a given 
> entry?
> 
> Cheers, bob
> 
> > On Oct 6, 2016, at 8:03 PM, bill lam <[email protected]> wrote:
> > 
> > Hi Bob,
> > 
> > I noticed you used boxed symbol as an example, why unboxed
> > symbol was not being used?
> > 
> > Each element of a symbol array can be literal or unicode string,
> > you may also show the type of its element.
> > 
> > Чт, 06 окт 2016, robert therriault написал(а):
> >> Hi everyone,
> >> 
> >> I have released a video that updates the Enhanced View and particularly to 
> >> get input on the type of information that should be supplied for symbol 
> >> and sparse array types. I have made some preliminary choices, but since I 
> >> do not commonly use these types, it would be great to get feedback from 
> >> those who are more familiar with these types.
> >> 
> >> Enhanced Update video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o6PTHmwgCLA
> >> 
> >> Cheers, bob
> >> 
> >> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> 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

Reply via email to