nested array formating is inconsistent

[Hans-Peter Sorge]

Hi,


⍝ just a simple matrix

  i∘.+i←¯1+⍳2
0 1
1 2

⍝ make it an element
  ⎕ ← e ← ⊂i∘.+i←¯1+⍳2
 0 1
 1 2


⍝ matrix of matrixes
  2 2 ⍴ e
 0 1   0 1
 1 2   1 2

 0 1   0 1
 1 2   1 2


⍝ enclose the matrix of matrixes indents nicely ...
  ⊂ 2 2 ⍴ e
  0 1   0 1
  1 2   1 2

  0 1   0 1
  1 2   1 2


⍝ display of enclose each 'sub'-matrix misses space line
  ⊂¨2 2 ⍴ e
  0 1   0 1
  1 2   1 2
  0 1   0 1
  1 2   1 2

Best Regards
Hans-Peter

Re: nested array formating is inconsistent

[Dr . Jürgen Sauermann]

  
  
Hi Hans-Peter,
  
  thanks, I will look into this.
  
  The general problem is that the rules how nested values with rank
  ≥ 2 should
  be displayed are, at least as far as I know, nowhere specified in
  a formal fashion.
  From old APL 1 we know that the higher dimensions (> 2) of a
  not-nested value
  shall be separated by a number of empty lines, but we don't really
  know, for example,
   how these separator lines should be handled when the value is
  being enclosed.
  
  To me it is not clear if there is a line missing in ⊂¨2 2 ⍴ e or if there
  maybe is a line
  too much in  ⊂2 2 ⍴ e (even though
that way it looks a little nicer).

Best Regards,
Jürgen



  
On 8/26/21 11:29 AM, Hans-Peter Sorge
  wrote:

Hi,
  
  
  
  ⍝ just a simple matrix
  
  
    i∘.+i←¯1+⍳2
  
  0 1
  
  1 2
  
  
  ⍝ make it an element
  
    ⎕ ← e ← ⊂i∘.+i←¯1+⍳2
  
   0 1
  
   1 2
  
  
  
  ⍝ matrix of matrixes
  
    2 2 ⍴ e
  
   0 1   0 1
  
   1 2   1 2
  
  
   0 1   0 1
  
   1 2   1 2
  
  
  
  ⍝ enclose the matrix of matrixes indents nicely ...
  
    ⊂ 2 2 ⍴ e
  
    0 1   0 1
  
    1 2   1 2
  
  
    0 1   0 1
  
    1 2   1 2
  
  
  
  ⍝ display of enclose each 'sub'-matrix misses space line
  
    ⊂¨2 2 ⍴ e
  
    0 1   0 1
  
    1 2   1 2
  
    0 1   0 1
  
    1 2   1 2
  
  
  Best Regards
  
  Hans-Peter
  


  

Re: nested array formating is inconsistent

[Dr . Jürgen Sauermann]

  
  
Hi again,
  
  checking the same in IBM APL2, the behaviour of GNU APL seems
  correct.
  (see attached Screenshot).
  
  Best Regards,
  Jürgen
  
  
  

On 8/26/21 5:58 PM, Dr. Jürgen
  Sauermann wrote:


  
  Hi Hans-Peter,

thanks, I will look into this.

The general problem is that the rules how nested values with
rank ≥ 2 should
be displayed are, at least as far as I know, nowhere specified
in a formal fashion.
From old APL 1 we know that the higher dimensions (> 2) of a
not-nested value
shall be separated by a number of empty lines, but we don't
really know, for example,
 how these separator lines should be handled when the value is
being enclosed.

To me it is not clear if there is a line missing in ⊂¨2 2 ⍴ e or if there
maybe is a line
too much in  ⊂2 2 ⍴ e (even
  though that way it looks a little nicer).
  
  Best Regards,
  Jürgen
  
  
  

  On 8/26/21 11:29 AM, Hans-Peter Sorge
wrote:
  
  Hi,



⍝ just a simple matrix 

  i∘.+i←¯1+⍳2 
0 1 
1 2 

⍝ make it an element 
  ⎕ ← e ← ⊂i∘.+i←¯1+⍳2 
 0 1 
 1 2 


⍝ matrix of matrixes 
  2 2 ⍴ e 
 0 1   0 1 
 1 2   1 2 

 0 1   0 1 
 1 2   1 2 


⍝ enclose the matrix of matrixes indents nicely ... 
  ⊂ 2 2 ⍴ e 
  0 1   0 1 
  1 2   1 2 

  0 1   0 1 
  1 2   1 2 


⍝ display of enclose each 'sub'-matrix misses space line 
  ⊂¨2 2 ⍴ e 
  0 1   0 1 
  1 2   1 2 
  0 1   0 1 
  1 2   1 2 

Best Regards 
Hans-Peter 
  
  


  

Re: nested array formating is inconsistent

[Louis Chretien via Bugs and suggestions for GNU APL]

I tried the same examples in APL/X and Dyalog APL.

APL/X seems to give the same results as GNU APL: but both enclose are indented 
right by one column



But Dyalog APL has quite a different result: no blank lines between rows.



> On Aug 26, 2021, at 12:44, Dr. Jürgen Sauermann 
>  wrote:
> 
> Hi again,
> 
> checking the same in IBM APL2, the behaviour of GNU APL seems correct.
> (see attached Screenshot).
> 
> Best Regards,
> Jürgen
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On 8/26/21 5:58 PM, Dr. Jürgen Sauermann wrote:
>> Hi Hans-Peter,
>> 
>> thanks, I will look into this.
>> 
>> The general problem is that the rules how nested values with rank ≥ 2 should
>> be displayed are, at least as far as I know, nowhere specified in a formal 
>> fashion.
>> From old APL 1 we know that the higher dimensions (> 2) of a not-nested value
>> shall be separated by a number of empty lines, but we don't really know, for 
>> example,
>>  how these separator lines should be handled when the value is being 
>> enclosed.
>> 
>> To me it is not clear if there is a line missing in ⊂¨2 2 ⍴ e or if there 
>> maybe is a line
>> too much in  ⊂2 2 ⍴ e (even though that way it looks a little nicer).
>> 
>> Best Regards,
>> Jürgen
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On 8/26/21 11:29 AM, Hans-Peter Sorge wrote:
>>> Hi, 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> ⍝ just a simple matrix 
>>> 
>>>   i∘.+i←¯1+⍳2 
>>> 0 1 
>>> 1 2 
>>> 
>>> ⍝ make it an element 
>>>   ⎕ ← e ← ⊂i∘.+i←¯1+⍳2 
>>>  0 1 
>>>  1 2 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> ⍝ matrix of matrixes 
>>>   2 2 ⍴ e 
>>>  0 1   0 1 
>>>  1 2   1 2 
>>> 
>>>  0 1   0 1 
>>>  1 2   1 2 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> ⍝ enclose the matrix of matrixes indents nicely ... 
>>>   ⊂ 2 2 ⍴ e 
>>>   0 1   0 1 
>>>   1 2   1 2 
>>> 
>>>   0 1   0 1 
>>>   1 2   1 2 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> ⍝ display of enclose each 'sub'-matrix misses space line 
>>>   ⊂¨2 2 ⍴ e 
>>>   0 1   0 1 
>>>   1 2   1 2 
>>>   0 1   0 1 
>>>   1 2   1 2 
>>> 
>>> Best Regards 
>>> Hans-Peter 
>> 
> 
> 


---
Louis Chrétien
lchret...@mac.com

Re: nested array formating is inconsistent

[Blake McBride]

I would think what APLX or Dialog do is somewhat irrelevant.  I believe GNU
APL is treating IBM APL 2 as the standard to be matched.

Blake


On Thu, Aug 26, 2021 at 12:21 PM Louis Chretien via Bugs and suggestions
for GNU APL  wrote:

> I tried the same examples in APL/X and Dyalog APL.
>
> APL/X seems to give the same results as GNU APL: but both enclose are
> indented right by one column
>
>
>
> But Dyalog APL has quite a different result: no blank lines between rows.
>
>
> On Aug 26, 2021, at 12:44, Dr. Jürgen Sauermann <
> m...@xn--jrgen-sauermann-zvb.de> wrote:
>
> Hi again,
>
> checking the same in IBM APL2, the behaviour of GNU APL seems correct.
> (see attached Screenshot).
>
> Best Regards,
> Jürgen
>
>
>
>
> On 8/26/21 5:58 PM, Dr. Jürgen Sauermann wrote:
>
> Hi Hans-Peter,
>
> thanks, I will look into this.
>
> The general problem is that the rules how nested values with rank ≥ 2
> should
> be displayed are, at least as far as I know, nowhere specified in a formal
> fashion.
> From old APL 1 we know that the higher dimensions (> 2) of a not-nested
> value
> shall be separated by a number of empty lines, but we don't really know,
> for example,
>  how these separator lines should be handled when the value is being
> enclosed.
>
> To me it is not clear if there is a line missing in *⊂¨2 2 ⍴ e* or if
> there maybe is a line
> too much in  *⊂2 2 ⍴ e* (even though that way it looks a little nicer).
>
> Best Regards,
> Jürgen
>
>
>
> On 8/26/21 11:29 AM, Hans-Peter Sorge wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
>
> ⍝ just a simple matrix
>
>   i∘.+i←¯1+⍳2
> 0 1
> 1 2
>
> ⍝ make it an element
>   ⎕ ← e ← ⊂i∘.+i←¯1+⍳2
>  0 1
>  1 2
>
>
> ⍝ matrix of matrixes
>   2 2 ⍴ e
>  0 1   0 1
>  1 2   1 2
>
>  0 1   0 1
>  1 2   1 2
>
>
> ⍝ enclose the matrix of matrixes indents nicely ...
>   ⊂ 2 2 ⍴ e
>   0 1   0 1
>   1 2   1 2
>
>   0 1   0 1
>   1 2   1 2
>
>
> ⍝ display of enclose each 'sub'-matrix misses space line
>   ⊂¨2 2 ⍴ e
>   0 1   0 1
>   1 2   1 2
>   0 1   0 1
>   1 2   1 2
>
> Best Regards
> Hans-Peter
>
>
>
> 
>
>
>
> ---
> Louis Chrétien
> lchret...@mac.com
>
>
>
>
>

Re: nested array formating is inconsistent

[Louis Chretien via Bugs and suggestions for GNU APL]

Which was sort of my point: APL/X and GNU APl have almost identical handling to 
that of IBM APL2.

i’m sorry if that was not stated clearly enough. The three of them: APL2, GNU 
APL and APL/X have almost identical handling of that issue.

Dyalog is clearly the odd man out.

> On Aug 26, 2021, at 13:26, Blake McBride  wrote:
> 
> I would think what APLX or Dialog do is somewhat irrelevant.  I believe GNU 
> APL is treating IBM APL 2 as the standard to be matched.
> 
> Blake
> 
> 
> On Thu, Aug 26, 2021 at 12:21 PM Louis Chretien via Bugs and suggestions for 
> GNU APL mailto:bug-apl@gnu.org>> wrote:
> I tried the same examples in APL/X and Dyalog APL.
> 
> APL/X seems to give the same results as GNU APL: but both enclose are 
> indented right by one column
> 
> 
> 
> But Dyalog APL has quite a different result: no blank lines between rows.
> 
> 
> 
>> On Aug 26, 2021, at 12:44, Dr. Jürgen Sauermann 
>> mailto:m...@xn--jrgen-sauermann-zvb.de>> 
>> wrote:
>> 
>> Hi again,
>> 
>> checking the same in IBM APL2, the behaviour of GNU APL seems correct.
>> (see attached Screenshot).
>> 
>> Best Regards,
>> Jürgen
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On 8/26/21 5:58 PM, Dr. Jürgen Sauermann wrote:
>>> Hi Hans-Peter,
>>> 
>>> thanks, I will look into this.
>>> 
>>> The general problem is that the rules how nested values with rank ≥ 2 should
>>> be displayed are, at least as far as I know, nowhere specified in a formal 
>>> fashion.
>>> From old APL 1 we know that the higher dimensions (> 2) of a not-nested 
>>> value
>>> shall be separated by a number of empty lines, but we don't really know, 
>>> for example,
>>>  how these separator lines should be handled when the value is being 
>>> enclosed.
>>> 
>>> To me it is not clear if there is a line missing in ⊂¨2 2 ⍴ e or if there 
>>> maybe is a line
>>> too much in  ⊂2 2 ⍴ e (even though that way it looks a little nicer).
>>> 
>>> Best Regards,
>>> Jürgen
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On 8/26/21 11:29 AM, Hans-Peter Sorge wrote:
 Hi, 
 
 
 ⍝ just a simple matrix 
 
   i∘.+i←¯1+⍳2 
 0 1 
 1 2 
 
 ⍝ make it an element 
   ⎕ ← e ← ⊂i∘.+i←¯1+⍳2 
  0 1 
  1 2 
 
 
 ⍝ matrix of matrixes 
   2 2 ⍴ e 
  0 1   0 1 
  1 2   1 2 
 
  0 1   0 1 
  1 2   1 2 
 
 
 ⍝ enclose the matrix of matrixes indents nicely ... 
   ⊂ 2 2 ⍴ e 
   0 1   0 1 
   1 2   1 2 
 
   0 1   0 1 
   1 2   1 2 
 
 
 ⍝ display of enclose each 'sub'-matrix misses space line 
   ⊂¨2 2 ⍴ e 
   0 1   0 1 
   1 2   1 2 
   0 1   0 1 
   1 2   1 2 
 
 Best Regards 
 Hans-Peter 
>>> 
>> 
>> 
> 
> 
> ---
> Louis Chrétien
> lchret...@mac.com 
> 
> 
> 
> 


---
Louis Chrétien
lchret...@mac.com

Re: nested array formating is inconsistent

[Hans-Peter Sorge]

Hi,

thank you for your insight.


⍝ However I'm not convinced.
⍝ Comparing expr. 1 (≡ 2)

  (⊂1 1)⍴ ¨2 2⍴1
 1   1

 1   1

⍝ to expr. 2  (≡ 3)
  ⊂¨(⊂1 1)⍴ ¨2 2⍴1
  1   1
  1   1


⍝ I would say the 'missing' space line is a bug.
⍝ The additional vertical space in expr. 2 is due to increasing depth.
⍝ But "removing" the horizontal space line makes viewing the output 
confusing.

⍝ For much more complex expressions it gets even counter intuitive.
⍝ It's basically about 'horizontal' vs 'vertical' formatting.

Best Regards
Hans-Peter





Am 26.08.21 um 19:26 schrieb Blake McBride:
I would think what APLX or Dialog do is somewhat irrelevant.  I 
believe GNU APL is treating IBM APL 2 as the standard to be matched.


Blake


On Thu, Aug 26, 2021 at 12:21 PM Louis Chretien via Bugs and 
suggestions for GNU APL mailto:bug-apl@gnu.org>> wrote:


I tried the same examples in APL/X and Dyalog APL.

APL/X seems to give the same results as GNU APL: but both enclose
are indented right by one column



But Dyalog APL has quite a different result: no blank lines
between rows.



On Aug 26, 2021, at 12:44, Dr. Jürgen Sauermann
mailto:m...@xn--jrgen-sauermann-zvb.de>> wrote:

Hi again,

checking the same in IBM APL2, the behaviour of GNU APL seems
correct.
(see attached Screenshot).

Best Regards,
Jürgen




On 8/26/21 5:58 PM, Dr. Jürgen Sauermann wrote:

Hi Hans-Peter,

thanks, I will look into this.

The general problem is that the rules how nested values with
rank ≥ 2 should
be displayed are, at least as far as I know, nowhere specified
in a formal fashion.
From old APL 1 we know that the higher dimensions (> 2) of a
not-nested value
shall be separated by a number of empty lines, but we don't
really know, for example,
 how these separator lines should be handled when the value is
being enclosed.

To me it is not clear if there is a line missing in *⊂¨2 2 ⍴ e*
or if there maybe is a line
too much in *⊂2 2 ⍴ e* (even though that way it looks a little
nicer).

Best Regards,
Jürgen



On 8/26/21 11:29 AM, Hans-Peter Sorge wrote:

Hi,


⍝ just a simple matrix

  i∘.+i←¯1+⍳2
0 1
1 2

⍝ make it an element
  ⎕ ← e ← ⊂i∘.+i←¯1+⍳2
 0 1
 1 2


⍝ matrix of matrixes
  2 2 ⍴ e
 0 1   0 1
 1 2   1 2

 0 1   0 1
 1 2   1 2


⍝ enclose the matrix of matrixes indents nicely ...
  ⊂ 2 2 ⍴ e
  0 1   0 1
  1 2   1 2

  0 1   0 1
  1 2   1 2


⍝ display of enclose each 'sub'-matrix misses space line
  ⊂¨2 2 ⍴ e
  0 1   0 1
  1 2   1 2
  0 1   0 1
  1 2   1 2

Best Regards
Hans-Peter








---
Louis Chrétien
lchret...@mac.com