You are welcome Roger On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 4:47 AM, roger stokes <[email protected]> wrote:
> Pepe, many thanks for swift reply > > Regards, > Roger > > On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 12:07 AM, Jose Mario Quintana < > [email protected]> wrote: > > > Roger, at the address I mentioned ( > > http://www.2bestsystems.com/foundation/j/jx0/index.html ) you can find a > > link to the article J Functional Programming Extensions that you might > find > > interesting. (There is also a J Cheatsheet.) > > > > > > On Mon, Jul 17, 2017 at 10:19 AM, roger stokes <[email protected] > > > > wrote: > > > > > 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. > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > 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
