That also.

But my point was that the "first class verb" concept being discussed
was a different one from the gerund use that you were documenting.

Thanks,

-- 
Raul


On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 10:20 PM, Louis de Forcrand <[email protected]> wrote:
> Sorry; I did digress from multiple assignment.
>
> Louis
>
>> On 19 Jul 2017, at 09:31, Raul Miller <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> I believe that this discussion was about something different.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> --
>> Raul
>>
>>> On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 3:45 AM, Louis de Forcrand <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> K supports first-class verbs; one can make an array of verbs, index one 
>>> out, and apply it to something using the same syntax as for normal function 
>>> application.
>>> This is feasable in J, but only by using a special "apply" verb (perhaps 
>>> gurus know another way?).
>>> Not trying to go full tacit,
>>>
>>> apply=: 4 : 0
>>> x`:6 y
>>> )
>>>
>>> for example.
>>>
>>> While this is more clunky, we must remember that:
>>> 1) K function application looks like this:
>>> user_defined_function[arg1;arg2;arg3;etc.]
>>> 2) K does not support tacit programming like J does. More specifically it 
>>> does not support trains. J would not be able to do this if there were no 
>>> noun / function / operator hierarchy:
>>> f ; g
>>> would that be a list of f and g or the train as we know it? The hierarchy 
>>> allows paren-free parsing rules and infix as well:
>>> f @ g instead of @[f;g]
>>>
>>> All in all, clunky first-class verbs are a price I am (and most Jers I 
>>> assume are) willing to pay in order to get trains. Like you say, a little 
>>> inconsistency can be very practical.
>>>
>>> Louis
>>>
>>>> On 18 Jul 2017, at 20:23, Raul Miller <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Specifically, what you call "first class verbs" are, according to the
>>>> dictionary, supposed to be trains.
>>>>
>>>> That this glitch seems useful says something, I think, about the value
>>>> of inconsistency.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Raul
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 6:52 PM, Jose Mario Quintana
>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>> Louis, call me Pepe (which is the nickname for Jose); that is how friends
>>>>> call me.
>>>>>
>>>>> Even if first-class verbs are not in compliance with the J Dictionary,
>>>>> official interpreters allow them but one has to wrestle with the
>>>>> interpreters.  Using first-class verbs, one can operate on verbs [0] in a
>>>>> similar way one can operate on nouns [1].  Jx extensions make their use
>>>>> more pleasant and goes beyond first-class verbs; Jx also facilitates to
>>>>> pass verbs, adverbs and conjunctions to verbs, adverbs and conjunctions to
>>>>> produce verbs, adverbs and conjunctions.
>>>>>
>>>>> [0] Tacit (unorthodox) version
>>>>>   https://rosettacode.org/wiki/First-class_functions#Tacit_.
>>>>> 28unorthodox.29_version
>>>>> [1] Tacit (unorthodox) version
>>>>>   https://rosettacode.org/wiki/First-class_functions/Use_
>>>>> numbers_analogously#Tacit_.28unorthodox.29_version
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 12:36 AM, Louis de Forcrand <[email protected]>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I’d guess is that by “unstable” he meant “currently being modified".
>>>>>> In any case, thanks for the link Jose (what should I call you? Pepe?).
>>>>>> If there was one thing I could add to J it would be better support for
>>>>>> first-class verbs (arrays of verbs, passing verbs as arguments), if only
>>>>>> for the beauty of it, but I know this is neither easy nor practical in
>>>>>> reality.
>>>>>> However trying out your new version of Jx is; I’ll take a look at it if 
>>>>>> you
>>>>>> release it. In the meantime I’ll look into your J701 version when I have
>>>>>> the time!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Louis
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 17 Jul 2017, at 20:21, HenryRich <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Unstable?  If you have a bug in J8.06, please post it at
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://code.jsoftware.com/wiki/System/Interpreter/Bugs
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I don't see any bugs that are new in 8.06, and plenty that are fixed
>>>>>> from previous versions.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Henry Rich
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 7/17/2017 7:06 PM, Jose Mario Quintana wrote:
>>>>>>>> Louis, a Jx interpreter implements extensions to the language.  It
>>>>>> supports
>>>>>>>> tacit programming full-heartedly and embraces first-class verbs.  There
>>>>>> are
>>>>>>>> publicly available patches for Jx extensions, as well as, a pre-built 
>>>>>>>> 32
>>>>>>>> bit Windows dll and Pre-built 32 and 64 bit Linux libs at
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> http://www.2bestsystems.com/foundation/j/jx0/index.html
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> but it is an early version of Jx based on the J701 source.  Jx has
>>>>>> evolved
>>>>>>>> (e.g., the primitives =.. and =:: were added afterwards) and J's core
>>>>>>>> engine has evolved rapidly as well; it has been very difficult to catch
>>>>>> up.
>>>>>>>> ("Be careful what you wish for.")  :)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The current unreleased version of Jx is based on the unstable official
>>>>>> J806
>>>>>>>> beta source and there are some relatively minor Jx glitches.  We were
>>>>>>>> planning to wait for the official J806 to become stable and resolve the
>>>>>> Jx
>>>>>>>> glitches but I might decide instead to release a current version, as 
>>>>>>>> is,
>>>>>>>> soon.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Mon, Jul 17, 2017 at 7:40 AM, 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
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>> This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
>>>>>>> http://www.avg.com
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>> 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
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm

Reply via email to