On Sat, Jan 16, 2010 at 9:47 PM, Viktor Cerovski
<[email protected]> wrote:
> In one of my posts I surmised that tacit verb programming
> should be an instance of monadic computations, where monadic
> is meant in the Haskell sense of the word. Since the claim
> is that monads are all-pervasive, just not usually seen as
> such, it's interesting to recognize which, if any, J programs
> could be proved to be (instances of) monadic computations.
I do not know about this claim.
I understand that a monadic system pervades all functions
used within that system. But I do not know if that matches
the sense of the claim you were referring to.
> The fruitful part of the endeavor was that, in order for
> any combination of verbs and conjunctions to become
> instances of monadic computations, three extensions
> of J parsing rules would suffice:
>
> 1) CONJ ADV VN * --> CONJ (VN ADV) * *
...
> 2) END ADV CONJ VN1 VN2 --> END VN1 CONJ VN2 ADV
...
I would like to see useful examples of these.
Number 2, especially, seems convoluted.
> 3) This extension is pertinent specifically to the
> example of ("_) as Lift and @ or @: as Bind, namely:
>
> f @ x === f x f @: x === f x
We already have a bind conjunction in J
which does exactly that.
I have also wished that @ would implement
this functionality directly.
--
Raul
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
