> If definitions were written with more redundancy, such as by > repeating the same definition in another way using different > words, the chances of erroneous interpretation would be > lessened.
If you repeat the same definition in another way using different words, chances are the two ways would have different meanings, and the ambiguity would be increased. ----- Original Message ----- From: Skip Cave <[email protected]> Date: Monday, January 11, 2010 20:46 Subject: [Jprogramming] The Ambiguous Dictionary To: Programming forum <[email protected]> > Dan Bron wrote: > > the DoJ is written in English, which can be ambiguous (as > any language can [3]), so the reader's understanding can differ > from the > author's intent. > > <<>> End quote > > Actually, this is an excellent argument for why the concise > definitions in the J Dictionary and J Vocabulary document are > sometimes difficult to understand, or may be misunderstood. > > Conciseness is a good thing, when all of the words and phrases > in the definition language mean exactly same thing to everyone > who reads them. The J programming language is a perfect example > of a language that means the same thing to everyone that reads > it. There is no ambiguity in a J program. There may be > misunderstandings, but no ambiguity. > > However as Dan says, English is an ambiguous language. The more > concise an English definition is, the more likely that an > ambiguous word could be misunderstood. The fewer the words in > the definition, the more likely that an alternate but valid > understanding of a single word in the definition can cause > misinterpretation of the whole definition. > > If definitions were written with more redundancy, such as by > repeating the same definition in another way using different > words, the chances of erroneous interpretation would be > lessened. > > Conciseness is good in an unambiguous language, and not so good > in an ambiguous one. It would probably help most newcomers to J > to have a more redundant DoJ and Vocabulary > > I have always felt the Iverson's penchant for conciseness was a > huge asset for language design, but a detriment for the > documentation. > > Skip Cave ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
