4 ms·

Any time I see APL code, I feel slightly stupid.

by leafario2 8y ago

FreeFull 8y ago
For the APL-family of languages, it's generally easier to write code than it is to read it.
- rpz 8y ago
  Agreed. Interesting thought: Would you or anyone else here also agree that it is generally easier to write mathematical notation than to read it? In my experience its much easier to write almost anything, whether it be code, poetry, english, etc. As opposed to reading it. I'm interested to hear your thoughts. Edit: Maybe i shouldnt say much easier. One could argue its much easier to read a novel than it is to write one, and i'd agree :)
  - yiyus 8y ago
    I like writing using mathematical notation. I like trying to express as much as possible using as few symbols as possible, and not as much rigour as I should. It's something that I used to do to study and I keep doing it for work now. It helps me to understand things better, but I don't think anybody else could understand what I write.
  - thisrod 8y ago
    This is a trade off. It's always easy to write unreadable stuff, hard to write stuff that's easy to read, and very hard to write stuff that's easy to read yet long enough to say something worth hearing.
  - akira2501 8y ago
    > Would you or anyone else here also agree that it is generally easier to write mathematical notation than to read it? Yes. In my estimation, it's due to a much higher density of conceptual ideas being expressed. I honestly prefer imperative code for stepping through a new idea because it simply can't be expressed in most dense and compressed form and probably because it's what I'm most familiar with. > One could argue its much easier to read a novel than it is to write one, and i'd agree :) I think it's because novels assume you're starting from a position of ignorance. Probably why I could never read Pynchon.
  - vlasev 8y ago
    Yes. It's quite easy to build up expressions one by one, whereas when you read those expressions, your eye and mind won't necessarily track through the same "derivation".
- cnasc 8y ago
  I seem to recall reading (maybe somewhere in the J docs, though I can't find it now) that some people are more content to rewrite a verb definition than to try and parse it out. That is, if you're refactoring code it's faster to write the thing again but better than it is to do small edits. Since the code is compact, I can see this. Any non-trivial refactoring of a verb is going to replace almost everything anyway. Definitely a different way of looking at things, and probably something that can only work in such a terse language.

Any time I see APL code, I feel slightly stupid.

FreeFull 8y ago

For the APL-family of languages, it's generally easier to write code than it is to read it.

rpz 8y ago
Agreed. Interesting thought: Would you or anyone else here also agree that it is generally easier to write mathematical notation than to read it? In my experience its much easier to write almost anything, whether it be code, poetry, english, etc. As opposed to reading it. I'm interested to hear your thoughts. Edit: Maybe i shouldnt say much easier. One could argue its much easier to read a novel than it is to write one, and i'd agree :)
- yiyus 8y ago
  I like writing using mathematical notation. I like trying to express as much as possible using as few symbols as possible, and not as much rigour as I should. It's something that I used to do to study and I keep doing it for work now. It helps me to understand things better, but I don't think anybody else could understand what I write.
- thisrod 8y ago
  This is a trade off. It's always easy to write unreadable stuff, hard to write stuff that's easy to read, and very hard to write stuff that's easy to read yet long enough to say something worth hearing.
- akira2501 8y ago
  > Would you or anyone else here also agree that it is generally easier to write mathematical notation than to read it? Yes. In my estimation, it's due to a much higher density of conceptual ideas being expressed. I honestly prefer imperative code for stepping through a new idea because it simply can't be expressed in most dense and compressed form and probably because it's what I'm most familiar with. > One could argue its much easier to read a novel than it is to write one, and i'd agree :) I think it's because novels assume you're starting from a position of ignorance. Probably why I could never read Pynchon.
- vlasev 8y ago
  Yes. It's quite easy to build up expressions one by one, whereas when you read those expressions, your eye and mind won't necessarily track through the same "derivation".
cnasc 8y ago
I seem to recall reading (maybe somewhere in the J docs, though I can't find it now) that some people are more content to rewrite a verb definition than to try and parse it out. That is, if you're refactoring code it's faster to write the thing again but better than it is to do small edits. Since the code is compact, I can see this. Any non-trivial refactoring of a verb is going to replace almost everything anyway. Definitely a different way of looking at things, and probably something that can only work in such a terse language.