I disagree: most people new to J will find tacit programming
impenetrable.  Providing an easy path seems like the least we can do.

As a new member told us at NYCJUG last week, he finds that the
introductory materials for J "start you out in the weeds", i.e. not
very accessible.

On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 3:40 PM, Henry Rich <henryhr...@nc.rr.com> wrote:
> Agreed.
>
> Henry Rich
>
> On 3/19/2012 9:05 AM, Dan Bron wrote:
>> Though not my usual position on J development, I'd support decommissioning 
>> 13 : .
>>
>> I see its function as more appropriate to a standard library than a 
>> primitive.  For one thing, libraries are easier to change than primitives, 
>> and therefore more amenable to user feedback.
>>
>> For another, I see 13 : 's role as primarily pedagogical, and the script 
>> could include additional teaching material that a primitive cannot. Also, I 
>> think using a script would discourage inappropriate (ab)use of the 
>> transformation, like blindly trusting it, or believing it has a role outside 
>> of learning how to write tacit verbs.
>>
>> -Dan
>>
>> PS: A note on usage; if we want an adverb to convert a (quoted) noun phrase 
>> to a tacit verb, then we only need to say  13 :  .  There is no need for 
>> curry, as in 13&  : , and in fact that phrase is a grammatical (syntax) 
>> error.  Currying is only needed to bind a noun to a verb.  Conjunctions like 
>>  :  have binding power already (in fact, that's why&  is a conjunction).
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: programming-boun...@jsoftware.com 
>> [mailto:programming-boun...@jsoftware.com] On Behalf Of Devon McCormick
>> Sent: Saturday, March 17, 2012 2:07 PM
>> To: Programming forum
>> Subject: Re: [Jprogramming] why=: 13 :'y*y*y'
>>
>> It's not a good advertisement for J when something so simple is so
>> clearly wrong.  I would certainly rank fixing an obvious bug over,
>> say, a performance improvement in a little-used feature like look-up
>> of symbolic names.
>>
>> On Sat, Mar 17, 2012 at 1:26 PM, Tracy Harms<kalei...@gmail.com>  wrote:
>>> To clarify, I do think 13&: could be improved. I think your examples can
>>> help with that. I don't find flaws in this modifier very interesting among
>>> possible improvement efforts.
>>> On Mar 17, 2012 3:45 AM, "Linda Alvord"<lindaalv...@verizon.net>  wrote:
>>>
>>>> David Ward Lambert pointed out the known pitfall that occurs using  : 13 :
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Would these examples help in correcting the problem?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>    why=: 13 :'y+y'  NB. wrong
>>>>
>>>>    why
>>>>
>>>> +
>>>>
>>>>    why 3
>>>>
>>>> 3
>>>>
>>>>    why=: 13 :'y-y'  NB. right
>>>>
>>>>    why
>>>>
>>>> -~
>>>>
>>>>    why 3
>>>>
>>>> 0
>>>>
>>>>    why=: 13 :'y*y'  NB. wrong
>>>>
>>>>    why
>>>>
>>>> *
>>>>
>>>>    why 3
>>>>
>>>> 1
>>>>
>>>>    why=: 13 :'y%y'  NB. right
>>>>
>>>>    why
>>>>
>>>> %~
>>>>
>>>>    why 3
>>>>
>>>> 1
>>>>
>>>>    why=: 13 :'y+y+y' NB. wrong
>>>>
>>>>    why
>>>>
>>>> ] + +
>>>>
>>>>    why 3
>>>>
>>>> 6
>>>>
>>>>    why=: 13 :'y-y-y'  NB. right
>>>>
>>>>    why
>>>>
>>>> ] - -~
>>>>
>>>>    why 3
>>>>
>>>> 3
>>>>
>>>>    why=: 13 :'y*y*y'  NB. wrong
>>>>
>>>>    why
>>>>
>>>> ] * *
>>>>
>>>>    why 3
>>>>
>>>> 3
>>>>
>>>>    why=: 13 :'y%y%y'  NB. right
>>>>
>>>>    why
>>>>
>>>> ] % %~
>>>>
>>>>    why 3
>>>>
>>>> 3
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Linda
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
>>>>
>>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
>>
>>
>>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm



-- 
Devon McCormick, CFA
^me^ at acm.
org is my
preferred e-mail
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm

Reply via email to