4 ms·
The only explanation I see here for what's wrong with J is > Among other things, notation, believe it or not, is much more practical and easier to learn than a
by neolog 5y ago
The only explanation I see here for what's wrong with J is
> Among other things, notation, believe it or not, is much more practical and easier to learn than a seemingly random mish-mash of ASCII characters.
Is that your main problem with J?
- robomartin 5y agoProbably a two part objection: First, abandoning a new branch of computing that started with the development of a specialized notation. As I said elsewhere, the power this offers cannot be appreciated without a suitable frame of reference. This can be either the use of APL (to a good degree of competency, not just dabbling) or a reasonable analog, such as musical notation. The timing for the introduction of J was terrible. Computers made the transition from text-only terminal output to full-on, character-agnostic and graphically-rich output just around that time. I can't fault Iverson for this, nobody has a crystal ball. Having the inventor/founder of APL leave the language behind for a half measure that was primarily a reaction to character-only computers did a lot of damage to APL. One has to wonder how things might have evolved had he stayed the course he charted. After three decades of educating an entire community on the value and power of notation he threw it all away purely due to a mistimed decision about computer hardware of the day. As I said elsewhere, not the first time and not the last time someone in technology makes a bad decision. None of us are immune to this.
- mlajtos 5y agoJ started in 1990, Mac was 6 years old. I think it was pretty obvious GUIs will stay, no?