4 ms·
- My professor was completely against the idea of using proprietary software. Also, we were supposed to use APL, not other languages. - I see that support has
by valcron1000 4y ago
- My professor was completely against the idea of using proprietary software. Also, we were supposed to use APL, not other languages.
- I see that support has improved. I didn't find any keyboard support for Windows at the time. Still, dealing with a different keyboard layout was a total pain.
- I wouldn't call the APL community "big". The're are around 2K users combining all of those platforms. Now include the language barrier (I'm from Argentina) and go back a couple of years and you can see the issue.
- The APL version we were using had dynamic scoping. TIL that there are multiple variations of the same language with totally different semantics!
- Yes, that level of terseness involves hacky code which is hard to understand, review and mantain. This is 100% my opinion.
Overall I wouldn't recommend APL or derivatives at all for any serious project.
- rak1507 4y ago'The APL version we were using had dynamic scoping. TIL that there are multiple variations of the same language with totally different semantics!' - your own code uses localisation within tradfns! Dfns just do that by default.
- mlochbaum 4y agoOr derivatives?? Generalizing from GNU APL to APL as a whole is a stretch in my opinion, but telling people not to use K on the basis of your APL experiences is something else entirely. They are very different languages. For example K uses only ASCII and has never supported dynamic scoping, only (somewhat restricted) lexical scoping.