Roger wrote: > So do you stop using vectors in J because there is a > limitation on the vector size?
The analogy does not hold water. According to [1], the limit on vectors is imposed by my physical hardware. That is a fine and practical limit. I have never hit it, and do not foresee hitting it. Neither does it inhibit my use of the language qua notation (e.g. [2]). The limit on recursion is imposed by the language in which J is implemented. That is an artificial and arbitrary limit. I have hit it on several occasions, and I can foresee hitting it again (indeed, it is this anxiety that we are discussing). Furthermore, it inhibits my use of the language as a notation, simply because I have hit it enough in practice to learn to exclude $: from my thought processes. I am not unreasonable. For example, I do not avoid trains simply because impractically long trains crash J [3]. But I've been burned often enough by recursion that not only do I avoid it, but I offer warnings about it. Now, it is possible that the changes in [3] have rendered this a practical limit, and that my Pavlovian response was acquired before that improvement. It would be nice to learn the question is now academic; but I would need to be convinced. Certainly I've seen recursion-related problems since then [4], and not all of them were mine [5,6]. -Dan [1] http://www.jsoftware.com/help/dictionary/dx003.htm#1 [2] http://www.jsoftware.com/pipermail/chat/2009-December/002662.html [3] http://www.jsoftware.com/jwiki/System/Interpreter/Bugs#longtraincrash [4] http://www.jsoftware.com/jwiki/System/Interpreter/Bugs#tallstackcrash [5] http://www.jsoftware.com/jwiki/System/Interpreter/Bugs06#head-421860e3461b80ec027da0587b858392bd462b26 [6] http://www.jsoftware.com/pipermail/general/2008-January/031400.html ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
