5 ms·

I worked in Pascal, C/C++, Java, Python, R, Nim, Clojure, Rust, Go, Js, and created various projects in these languages. However, I couldn't get used to Q. I u

I worked in Pascal, C/C++, Java, Python, R, Nim, Clojure, Rust, Go, Js, and created various projects in these languages. However, I couldn't get used to Q. I understand that it is fast, and I also started to like the functional programming aspect of it. But oh boy, there is no proper error messages (no, "`type" is not helpful). The short versions of various map and apply were handy, but there are no equivalent versions with longer names, therefore there is no way to write a code which is readable to a non Q-expert. The strange evaluation order made it impossible for me to read other people's code, I often started to add parentheses and checked whether the behavior changed. There is no debugger (I used KdbStudio). Once I used more than 16 local variables, which gave a runtime error with some strange unhelpful error message. I'm not questioning its usefulness, but I think that it could be much more developer friendly without compromising speed.

easytiger 9y ago
> therefore there is no way to write a code which is readable to a non Q-expert. If you could FD wouldn't be able to justify charging £1.5k/day per head consultancy fees for someone they just sent on a 1 week training course.
geocar 9y ago
I have worked in C (twenty-five years), C++, Python, Perl (twenty years), JavaScript, Common Lisp (for ten years), OCaml, forth, postscript, and also q/Kdb. I think a lot can be done to improve teaching q/Kdb. The current “best practice” is to change you until it makes sense but this takes time- anywhere from 6 months to a couple years based on your other experiences. And you still have to want to “get it”. I want that to be better. However this is alien technology: the terseness is a feature. Limited locals are a feature. The evaluation order is a feature. These things actually help it go fast (as surprising as that is!) We only just recently got “a debugger” and good error messages because of repeated complaints and wishes for it from newbies, but there is a reason experienced Kdb/q programmers never wanted it. Why doesn’t that reason prompt those newbies to figure out why? Yes, ideally you would learn the way and the why we do things, but there are a number of serious hurdles to overcome: To you q/Kdb seems merely unpolished even if maybe “fast”. Is it worth it? “Maybe”, you suggest, but then there are crazy people like me telling you something preposterous; that q/Kdb is actually incredibly well crafted, highly readable and an absolute pleasure to use. I'm also trying to say that everything is worth learning: Nim and Python and JavaScript are all basically the same thing. You learned one of them, you kindof learned them all, so adding another one feels like these things are easy to learn. Alien technology is alien though, you haven't learned any of it. How can we even talk to each other? I'm hopeful: Lambda was tricky, but it snuck in to things. Can we get tables, views, and high code density? We need to find something better- some better way to talk about it, but the peanut gallery is loud.
- hoosieree 9y ago
  > Nim and Python and JavaScript are all basically the same thing. You learned one of them, you kindof learned them all, so adding another one feels like these things are easy to learn. Alien technology is alien though, you haven't learned any of it. How can we even talk to each other? This is an understatement. It helps explain why a person who has never programmed will pick up APL/J/K easier than someone who already knows Python or C.
  - icen 9y ago
    One of the things that the GP complains about is evaluation order - in k it follows a simple rule very consistently - programs are evaluated top to bottom, and each expression is evaluated right to left. There are no precedence rules. The instance that I see trip people up all the time is the cast operator $ - people coming from other languages like C or Java expect this to bind more tightly than other operators, but doesn't.
  - geocar 9y ago
    > It helps explain why a person who has never programmed will pick up APL/J/K easier than someone who already knows Python or C. I disagree with this. It is probably easier to teach someone APL/J/K if they don't think they already know Python or C, but, an experienced C+K programmer will be able to teach a willing C programmer K very quickly. Many q/Kdb guides start with simple things like addition and subtraction but with vectors, like a Python programmer really cares about the difference between: prd 1+til x and: numpy.arange(1,1+x).prod() and heck, that Python programmer probably thinks that looks better or "cleaner". They might argue about whether it should be two steps or an extra parenthesis, or whatever, but the relationship between capability and semantic appears roughly the same. That's why I start with tables, IPC, and views. It's one of those things that makes python programmers go "whoah": They quickly get kdb tables are way better with queries, that IPC is "like pickle times asyncio on steroids", and "just wow" to views. If you do not see someone do something that you are struggling with quickly and effortlessly it will be difficult to drop your ego; If you really think "yeah but everything else is easier in python" then it is a handle to hold onto. q/Kdb makes a lot of really hard things easy, and it gets them extremely right. That's right: Fuck speed. I like programming in q/Kdb because I'm more effective: It's a better language, with a better set of builtins and libraries. And so on.
anonu 9y ago
> The strange evaluation order made it impossible for me to read other people's code, Its quite strictly evaluated right to left... Which I think is one of the best features over most other languages.

easytiger 9y ago

> therefore there is no way to write a code which is readable to a non Q-expert. If you could FD wouldn't be able to justify charging £1.5k/day per head consultancy fees for someone they just sent on a 1 week training course.

geocar 9y ago

I have worked in C (twenty-five years), C++, Python, Perl (twenty years), JavaScript, Common Lisp (for ten years), OCaml, forth, postscript, and also q/Kdb. I think a lot can be done to improve teaching q/Kdb. The current “best practice” is to change you until it makes sense but this takes time- anywhere from 6 months to a couple years based on your other experiences. And you still have to want to “get it”. I want that to be better. However this is alien technology: the terseness is a feature. Limited locals are a feature. The evaluation order is a feature. These things actually help it go fast (as surprising as that is!) We only just recently got “a debugger” and good error messages because of repeated complaints and wishes for it from newbies, but there is a reason experienced Kdb/q programmers never wanted it. Why doesn’t that reason prompt those newbies to figure out why? Yes, ideally you would learn the way and the why we do things, but there are a number of serious hurdles to overcome: To you q/Kdb seems merely unpolished even if maybe “fast”. Is it worth it? “Maybe”, you suggest, but then there are crazy people like me telling you something preposterous; that q/Kdb is actually incredibly well crafted, highly readable and an absolute pleasure to use. I'm also trying to say that everything is worth learning: Nim and Python and JavaScript are all basically the same thing. You learned one of them, you kindof learned them all, so adding another one feels like these things are easy to learn. Alien technology is alien though, you haven't learned any of it. How can we even talk to each other? I'm hopeful: Lambda was tricky, but it snuck in to things. Can we get tables, views, and high code density? We need to find something better- some better way to talk about it, but the peanut gallery is loud.

hoosieree 9y ago
> Nim and Python and JavaScript are all basically the same thing. You learned one of them, you kindof learned them all, so adding another one feels like these things are easy to learn. Alien technology is alien though, you haven't learned any of it. How can we even talk to each other? This is an understatement. It helps explain why a person who has never programmed will pick up APL/J/K easier than someone who already knows Python or C.
- icen 9y ago
  One of the things that the GP complains about is evaluation order - in k it follows a simple rule very consistently - programs are evaluated top to bottom, and each expression is evaluated right to left. There are no precedence rules. The instance that I see trip people up all the time is the cast operator $ - people coming from other languages like C or Java expect this to bind more tightly than other operators, but doesn't.
- geocar 9y ago
  > It helps explain why a person who has never programmed will pick up APL/J/K easier than someone who already knows Python or C. I disagree with this. It is probably easier to teach someone APL/J/K if they don't think they already know Python or C, but, an experienced C+K programmer will be able to teach a willing C programmer K very quickly. Many q/Kdb guides start with simple things like addition and subtraction but with vectors, like a Python programmer really cares about the difference between: prd 1+til x and: numpy.arange(1,1+x).prod() and heck, that Python programmer probably thinks that looks better or "cleaner". They might argue about whether it should be two steps or an extra parenthesis, or whatever, but the relationship between capability and semantic appears roughly the same. That's why I start with tables, IPC, and views. It's one of those things that makes python programmers go "whoah": They quickly get kdb tables are way better with queries, that IPC is "like pickle times asyncio on steroids", and "just wow" to views. If you do not see someone do something that you are struggling with quickly and effortlessly it will be difficult to drop your ego; If you really think "yeah but everything else is easier in python" then it is a handle to hold onto. q/Kdb makes a lot of really hard things easy, and it gets them extremely right. That's right: Fuck speed. I like programming in q/Kdb because I'm more effective: It's a better language, with a better set of builtins and libraries. And so on.

anonu 9y ago

> The strange evaluation order made it impossible for me to read other people's code, Its quite strictly evaluated right to left... Which I think is one of the best features over most other languages.