> This seems like a pretty low-effort write-up. You're not the audience for the article and that's what this entire thread shows. You missed the fact that you

> This seems like a pretty low-effort write-up. You're not the audience for the article and that's what this entire thread shows. You missed the fact that you were not the audience, and that makes this a low-effort dismissal. Rather than trying to get the point of the article, you're picking on minutiae and trying to pick it apart. This is why we can't have nice discussions about programming languages. The audience for the article is: people using, learning, or interested in J, who want to know how to think about loops in a "loopless" way, which the language encourages. The fact that you're talking about linear algebra libraries shows that you're not the audience the article is written for. None of your points are wrong, in some cases you are literally restating my points, but you're not getting the emphasis. Rather than try to prove the article wrong, why not try to see it for what it is, and who it is aimed for, and leave it at that?