Oh, I missed a couple of comments.

Raul wrote:
> First, you need some mechanism for taking a noun and 
> converting it to an atomic representation of a noun. 

I should state that I already have this (you can see it in the script).  Right 
now, I rely on   ".  to convert anonymous nouns to
their gerundial forms.  It could be argued that  ".  is ambiguously tacit, at 
best.  That's fine, writing a noun-interpreter is
pretty easy.

>  and the design of such expressions exactly matches the 
>  design of explicit expressions 

I disagree here.  Put another way,  +`-`*(`:6) or  +`...@.(0 1 2)  is the same 
as (+ - *) and uses the same mechanism to produce
that result (obviously).  If you're pointing out that  + 1 : '+ - *'  does too, 
you're right.  But that's only because the
explicit interpreter relies on the standard interpreter for the majority of its 
work, and only extends it to handle control words
(even local names use the global name mechanism;  :  just introduces an 
anonymous locale).

Of course, from a pragmatic POV, the exercise holds little interest in the 
first place.  But I admit my interest in J isn't very
pragmatic.  If yours is, this thread can't offer you very much.

-Dan  

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

Reply via email to