"Raul Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 3/17/08, Mark D. Niemiec <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I wasn't suggesting that _. be removed from the language;
> > it seems that in 6.02 this is already being done in part.
> > I was merely suggesting that the spelling '_.' be removed
> > from the number parser. so there was no 'easy' way for a
> > J prgram to create NaNs. This is currently already the
> > case for -NaN, and all the other flavors of NaN.
>
> Wouldn't this make testing difficult?
For test suites, one can still always hand-craft a NaN:
[ nan =: 3!:2 a.{~225 0 0 0 8 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 248 255
_.
However, it's much harder to create one inadvertently if one can't spell it.
It's much easier to weed out old code if a spelling error (or similar)
is signalled (much like how x. y. u. v. m. n. were changed in 6.01)
(Now, I'm generally against ripping functionality out, but since
most natural uses of _. have already been removed in 6.02, if the
spelling of _. is ever to also be deprecated, the time to do it is now.)
-- Mark D. Niemiec <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
