Dear Juergen, Thanks! Two small adjustments, if you care to, and it will be perfect.
1. There should be 4 spaces before the closing ∇ (it really looks strange flushed left) 2. There should be a line with 4 spaces and a ∇ before line 0 Thanks for making the changes! Blake On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 7:24 AM, Juergen Sauermann < juergen.sauerm...@t-online.de> wrote: > 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 > > > >
