Hi Blake,
thanks, fixed in SVN 265.
/// Jürgen
On 05/13/2014 05:07 PM, Blake McBride wrote:
In GNU APL, when you list a function via:
∇fun[⎕]∇
the format of the returned output has several problems
(inconsistencies with respect to the IBM documentation). Some of the
differences are small but it would be nice of they were corrected.
One difference is important in my opinion. I will use the following
function as an example:
∇myfun[⎕]∇
[0] z←myfun x
[1] ⍝ sample function
[2] →(x < 5)/EN1
[3] z←x+10
[4] →END
[5] EN1:x←x
[6] END:
1. The first problem (and the one I feel is important) is that a
closing ∇ is not shown. The reason this is important is to avoid
confusion over whether you are seeing the entire function definition
or not. Without the closing ∇ you are not sure if you see the whole
function, or the display is being chopped off early.
2. To be consistent, an opening ∇ should be shown.
3. There should be 3 spaces between the line number designation (i.e.
[4]) and the code not 1. This is important because of the following item.
4. Code lines that begin with ⍝ or a line label are separated from
the line number designation by 2 spaces rather than 3. This is to
make those lines stick out to the eye. It makes the code easier to read.
5. When the line numbers go from one digit to two, the space between
the line number designation and the code is reduced by one. A more
accurate way of describing this is that the line number designation
always takes up 5 character positions. Doing this, code is always
consistently aligned regardless of the number of digits in the line
number designation.
Taking all the above into account, this is what should be displayed:
∇myfun[⎕]∇
∇
[0] z←myfun x
[1] ⍝ sample function
[2] →(x < 5)/EN1
[3] z←x+10
[4] →END
[5] EN1:x←x
[6] END:
∇
I would imagine that these changes are trivial, but I think they would
make the system much more consistent. The following are some
references for you to verify my findings:
IBM APL2 Programming: Language Reference, page 346
ibid, page 383
Thanks.
Blake
