> I realize longtimers are used to this, but, for > beginners, the current situation adds unnecessary confusion. It's > "overloading", which is often frowned upon when it comes to clarity.
I take it that instead of + , you would prefer boolean_plus integer_plus real_plus complex_plus boolean_plus_vector integer_plus_vector real_plus_vector complex_plus_vector boolean_plus_matrix integer_plus_matrix real_plus_matrix complex_plus_matrix boolean_plus_rank3 integer_plus_rank3 real_plus_rank3 complex_plus_rank3 etc. ----- Original Message ----- From: PackRat <[email protected]> Date: Monday, January 25, 2010 14:37 Subject: Re: [Jprogramming] The Ambiguous Dictionary To: Programming forum <[email protected]> > Fraser Jackson wrote: > > Ric has posted a modification of Devon's Vocab page. If the > > objective is to have something clearer to the beginner, then the > > page needs complete consistency and some additional guides as > to its > > structure. > > As a J neophyte, two suggestions come to mind for this project > based on > my experience thus far: > > (1) put groupings of verb, adverb, and conjunction primitives on > SEPARATE pages because each part of speech performs a different > function > > (2) put the monadic and dyadic treatments (definitions and > examples) of > each primitive on two SEPARATE pages > > Regarding the first item above, this is NOT to say that there > can't > also be a "master index" page that contains everything, like the > current "Vocabulary" page. > > The second item above would be helpful because the J dictionary > currently treats primitives as language homographs (look the > same but > have different meanings), having all meanings combined on the > same > entry. Some dictionaries actually separate homographs into > separate > entries (sometimes numerically superscripted or > subscripted). Though > the monadic and dyadic forms of a primitive may be similar or > related, > they are still TWO DIFFERENT THINGS and ought to be separated, > just as > inflected primitives are separated from each other. (In > other words, > "verb y" has a different meaning from "x verb y", just as "verb" > and > "verb." and "verb:" have different meanings from each other, > though > often related.) I realize longtimers are used to this, > but, for > beginners, the current situation adds unnecessary > confusion. It's > "overloading", which is often frowned upon when it comes to clarity. > > Harvey > > ----------------------------------------------------------------- > ----- > For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
