Louis, I am with you on this.
Pepe, I would be very interested to see some introductory documentation
of your project
Regards
Roger
On Mon, Jul 17, 2017 at 12:40 PM, Louis de Forcrand <[email protected]>
wrote:
> A lot has been said on these forums about Jx and Unbox.
> They are unofficial J interpreters (with extensions to the language), are
> they not?
> Are they publicly available? I couldn't find anything about them on Google
> except older messages in the forum archives, but then again unfortunately
> this language's name makes it sometimes hard to look up on the web.
>
> Thanks!
> Louis
>
> > On 16 Jul 2017, at 15:37, Raul Miller <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > Sure, and the biggest problem here is the use of globals for arguments.
> >
> > The verbs themselves can be pure, but all we're really doing is
> > rearranging the deck chairs.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > --
> > Raul
> >
> >
> > On Sun, Jul 16, 2017 at 3:33 PM, Jose Mario Quintana
> > <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> At least we agree, I think, on one thing " in explicit programming
> >> [typically] names refer to arguments while in tacit programming they do
> >> not." Thus, is not just a matter of tacit aesthetics, there are some
> >> consequences which might be difficult to evade:
> >>
> >> ('`u v') =: +/`*:
> >> u@:v f.
> >> +/@:*:
> >>
> >> ('`u v') =:: +/`*: NB. Jx
> >> ┌───────┬──┐
> >> │┌─┬───┐│*:│
> >> ││/│┌─┐││ │
> >> ││ ││+│││ │
> >> ││ │└─┘││ │
> >> │└─┴───┘│ │
> >> └───────┴──┘
> >> u@:v f.
> >> +/@:*:
> >>
> >> ('`u v') is +/`*: NB.
> >> |domain error
> >> | (m) =:y
> >> is
> >> 1 : '(m)=:y'
> >>
> >> So, assuming I understood the intended use of your adverb is, I am
> afraid
> >> your adverb cannot be used without typical limitations.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>> On Sun, Jul 16, 2017 at 1:59 PM, Raul Miller <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> I think you are trying to evade a basic issue, which is that the
> >>> distinction between tacit and explicit programming is that in explicit
> >>> programming names refer to arguments while in tacit programming they
> >>> do not.
> >>>
> >>> Altering the implementation to come up with evasive ways of having
> >>> named arguments is what's stinky, from my point of view.
> >>>
> >>> Thanks though,
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> Raul
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Sun, Jul 16, 2017 at 12:13 PM, Jose Mario Quintana
> >>> <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>>> Nice try but when I am wearing my hard-core tacit programmer hat I do
> not
> >>>> like to look at blatant ugly explicit definitions which are referring
> to
> >>>> arguments. ;) Heck, I do not like the smell of verbs of this kind
> >>> either,
> >>>>
> >>>> stinky=. ('''' , [ , '''' , a. {~ 38 40 52 32 58 39 40 120 41 61 58 32
> >>> 121
> >>>> 39 41"_) 128!:2 ]
> >>>>
> >>>> PS. Feel free to bring any argument suggesting that verbs involving
> side
> >>>> effects are not tacit.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On Fri, Jul 14, 2017 at 6:46 PM, Raul Miller <[email protected]>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> And yet, all of your verbs can be pure tacit.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> For example, you could use
> >>>>>
> >>>>> is=:1 :'(m)=:y'
> >>>>>
> >>>>> That said, there is an argument that side effects make a verb impure.
> >>> But I
> >>>>> am ignoring that kind of thing.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Thanks,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> --
> >>>>> Raul
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Friday, July 14, 2017, Jose Mario Quintana <
> >>>>> [email protected]>
> >>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> That is a different matter.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Indeed, "=: works and is simple" as long as one is not concerned
> about
> >>>>>> producing (pure) tacit verbs. In that latter context, apparently,
> it
> >>>>> does
> >>>>>> not work well, is not simple to use and its forced use might trigger
> >>>>> gross
> >>>>>> space and time inefficiencies (for example, as discussed recently in
> >>> the
> >>>>>> "[Jprogramming] Side effects in tacit expressions" thread).
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Introducing new primitives is, in my view, a matter of perspective
> and
> >>>>>> opportunity. I thought the verbs =.. and =:: had sufficient merits
> >>> and
> >>>>> I
> >>>>>> had the means to include them in the version of the J interpreter
> >>> that I
> >>>>>> use almost all the time (Jx). I just thought this could be an
> >>>>> opportunity
> >>>>>> to make the official interpreter a little more tacit friendly for
> the
> >>>>>> benefit of other tacit programming hard-core fans; that is all.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> In any case, there are other much more important unfortunate
> >>> omissions,
> >>>>> in
> >>>>>> current official implementations, that drastically hinder tacit
> >>>>> programming
> >>>>>> (but that is yet another topic for another time).
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On Thu, Jul 13, 2017 at 8:36 PM, Raul Miller <[email protected]
> >>>>>> <javascript:;>> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Ok, but a routine being interesting is not sufficient motivation
> for
> >>>>>>> incorporating it as a language primitive. There are just too many
> >>>>>>> interesting possibilities.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> =: works and is simple.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Thanks,
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>> Raul
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> On Thursday, July 13, 2017, Jose Mario Quintana <
> >>>>>>> [email protected] <javascript:;>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> These [0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5] are more forum instances of use or
> >>> suggested
> >>>>>> use
> >>>>>>>> of the verb 4 :'(x)=: y' (or equivalent),
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> [0] [Jprogramming] Tacit or Explicit Raul Miller
> >>>>>>>> http://www.jsoftware.com/pipermail/programming/2017-
> >>>>>>>> January/046538.html
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> [1] [Jbeta] with effort for inplace assignment performance Raul
> >>>>> Miller
> >>>>>>>> http://www.jsoftware.com/pipermail/beta/2016-July/008397.html
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> [2] [Jprogramming] copula Raul Miller
> >>>>>>>> http://www.jsoftware.com/pipermail/programming/2014-
> >>>>>>>> November/040246.html
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> [3] [Jbeta] Why isn't copula a dyadic verb? Pascal Jasmin
> >>>>>>>> http://www.jsoftware.com/pipermail/beta/2014-November/007754.html
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> [4] [Jprogramming] copula Dan Bron
> >>>>>>>> http://www.jsoftware.com/pipermail/programming/2014-
> >>>>>> June/037704.html
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> [5] Jforum: Syntax error on "is =: =:" josemarioquintana
> >>>>>>>> http://www.jsoftware.com/pipermail/general/2002-June/009932.html
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> On Wed, Jul 12, 2017 at 8:11 PM, Jose Mario Quintana <
> >>>>>>>> [email protected] <javascript:;> <javascript:;>>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Sure, there are different ways to perform a task, for example,
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> 2&* 1 2 3
> >>>>>>>>> 2 4 6
> >>>>>>>>> +: 1 2 3
> >>>>>>>>> 2 4 6
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> What do you mean by "the rest of that"?
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> On Wed, Jul 12, 2017 at 7:40 PM, Raul Miller <
> >>>>> [email protected]
> >>>>>> <javascript:;>
> >>>>>>>> <javascript:;>>
> >>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> All [1] needed was
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> add=:4 :0
> >>>>>>>>>> ((0{::y),'__x')=: ".1{::y
> >>>>>>>>>> )
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> But I don't really follow the rest of that.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>>>>> Raul
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Jul 12, 2017 at 7:14 PM, Jose Mario Quintana
> >>>>>>>>>> <[email protected] <javascript:;> <javascript:;>>
> >>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>> The assignments are a consequence of J's agreement; see [0]
> >>> for
> >>>>>>>> example.
> >>>>>>>>>>> If one wants the effect of 'a b c' =:i.3 4 5 using the
> >>> verb is
> >>>>>>> (or
> >>>>>>>> a
> >>>>>>>>>>> similar verb) then one can use 'a b c' is i.3 4 5 :)
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> How is 'abc' is"0 i.3 4 5 useful? I do not know... Who
> >>>>> knows?
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> How is the verb is (or a similar verb) useful? See [1,
> >>> 2]
> >>>>> for
> >>>>>>>>>> instance
> >>>>>>>>>>> (not to mention for debugging tacit verbs).
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> References
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> [0] Rank and Uniformity Roger K.W. Hui
> >>>>>>>>>>> http://www.jsoftware.com/papers/rank1.htm
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> [1] [Jprogramming] Dynamic Language Features in J? Oleg
> >>>>> Kobchenko
> >>>>>>>>>>> http://www.jsoftware.com/pipe
> >>> rmail/programming/2006-Decembe
> >>>>>>>>>> r/004479.html
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> [2] [Jprogramming] Saving Nouns as Permanent Data Jose Mario
> >>>>>>> Quintana
> >>>>>>>>>>> http://www.jsoftware.com/pipe
> >>> rmail/programming/2008-April/
> >>>>>>>>>> 010529.html
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>> ------------------------------------------------------------
> ----------
> >>>> 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
