Drumheller, Michael wrote:
> Hello all:
>
> I am brand new to J.  (I mean brand new as in, I heard about it for the
> first time the day before yesterdy--haven't even gotten through the
> first tutorial yet.)  Nevertheless, having found out about it via a
> mention of K on lambda-the-ultimate.org, I was immediately intrigued.  I
> work in the Math Group at Boeing (which is effectively an "internal
> consulting firm" for applied-math & software) and am always on the
> lookout for tools that might increase my group's effectiveness.  FYI my
> language background consists primarily of C++, Python, Perl, and Lisp.
>

Welcome Michael!  I strongly suggest you take a look at the first couple
of chapaters of Henry Rich's book "J for C programmers" (available in the
J distribution under "Help" or at

http://www.jsoftware.com/jwiki/Books

This makes a strong case for why programmers in structured languages
should look at J.

> I have two immediate worries about J that I wonder if people on this
> list could assuage:
>
> 1.  "J Programming Language" is a 562-hit Google query.  That is
> basically equal to zero, for large values of zero.  So I am immediately
> concerned that I am spending energy learning something that nobody knows
> about.  Is this just because J is so new?  Are there strong indications
> that the J community is growing in size and influence?
>

J is hard to search for, but it is there.   The J community is small but
growing.  In my opinion, it does not do a good job of selling itself. 
This has the advantage that anything good you have heard about J is likely
to be true.

> 2.  I was appalled at the "foo =. 3 : 0" syntax for defining a verb.

I would not get hung up on this.  Every language has its quirks.  Perl's
are too numerous to mention, and C++ does not come too far behind.  These
stand out to the beginner.  You'll also find that J programmers routinely
ignore the "use meaningful variable names" exhortation.

> 3.  Having just signed up for this mailing list, the first things I
> noticed were the mention of Mathematica and Maple (two languages with
> which, regrettably, I have little ande zero experience with,
> respectively).  Is is fair to regard J as a "challenger" in the
> Mathematica/Maple market.

Maple and Mathematica are primarily symbolic manipulation languages,
something J does not set out to be.  They intersect on many issues
involving numerical calculation.

Best wishes,

John

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm

Reply via email to