> but because it’s not compositional. Isn't it? What do you mean by it because it is but maybe you mean something else? Edit: answered below, let us read. >

> but because it’s not compositional. Isn't it? What do you mean by it because it is but maybe you mean something else? Edit: answered below, let us read. > I just think it would make it more popular. I think many languages are not looking for 'more popular' per se, especially if they have to sacrifice the basic principles of the language that users/fans like about it. Like Arthur/k I hate scrolling and I already ache seeing the masses of (for me unnecessary) code you produce out of the beauty that is APL. I work most of my time in languages far more verbose, so please do not take the nice languages that do not have that away from me. It wouldn't be very hard to write a language on top of k/apl to do that though if you wanted to; like q on k, as long as you can translate back to and inspect the original, like q on k, then it's not too bad I guess.