-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Mike Powell <[email protected]> writes:

> Why not allow J users to use Unicode names?  The J language can keep  
> the reserved names it uses now. Just let the users experiment. Surely,  
> if they make use of this and run into problems transferring code or  
> commentary back and forth, that's their look out; not something that J  
> Software Inc has to address. After all, Unicode data is being  
> transferred back and forth all the time in other contexts. The issues  
> are not special to J. Perhaps, by letting the users experiment with  
> different skins, something interesting and useful will emerge.

Mike,

I'm all for freedom, but I have a serious caution here:

Please think carefully, and then leave well enough alone.

Why?

First, I was involved years ago in early thinking at one company about
localizing software products.  I ran into attempts others had made to
"localize" things like Pascal, for example, by translating all the
keywords into various languages.  That takes a standard language and
makes it nonstandard.  That requires you translate each and every
program when you move between platforms.  It was a disaster that was
thankfully dropped early on.

   Pascal is a good example for another reason.  Many vendors seemed to
   want to augment their versions for commercial reasons,
   unfortunately.  That meant they'd have a standard Pascal plus a few
   features people would want to use that would lock them into that
   vendor.  That messed up reusability.

Even simpler things make trouble.  For example, the x. -> x conversion
challenge still crops up occasionally, although I guess I have to admit
that the language is not worse off for the change. :-) If we make
transliterations or translations or conversions such as that, we make
code reuse very hard.  J is so concise, though, that code reuse is
eminently practical, for I can learn phrases with immense utility simply
by reading and experimenting.  It would be a shame to lose that.

It's been my experience with J that most things make great sense after I
grok them better.  I don't know what you're doing, but I encourage you
not to think of J as a dialect of APL and translate mentally back and
forth but simply to think directly in J.

Bill
- -- 
Bill Harris                      http://facilitatedsystems.com/weblog/
Facilitated Systems                              Everett, WA 98208 USA
http://facilitatedsystems.com/                  phone: +1 425 374-1845
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAkolzdUACgkQ3J3HaQTDvd+tlACgg2mh8fXLdFFnvUUQWb1xz3Nv
ijgAn1HyIG7BlFWF+3IdRCceiT6gDjLk
=dDS5
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm

Reply via email to