On Sun, Mar 13, 2016 at 6:20 PM, Juergen Sauermann
wrote:
> it actually does create conflicts.
>
> In IBM APL2 and in GNU APL, the expression
>
> ⍺ (f g h) ⍵
>
> gives a 3 item vector with the items being ⍺, (f g h), and ⍵.
> In Dyalog APL it gives (quote):
>
> (⍺ f ⍵) g (⍺ h ⍵) ⍝ dyadic (fgh) for
Hi
All a sudden my apl keyboard chars stopped working after a year or so .. and
couldn't find the problem - so i decided to reinstall all from scratch
Hence ...
---
svn co http://svn.savannah.gnu.org/svn/apl/trunk apl -> version 704
cd apl
configure
make
---
g++ -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I..
Hi,
Ah I see if it conflicts when probably there is no way to introduce it.
Thanks for digging into it!
Juergen Sauermann writes:
> Hi Alexey,
>
> it actually does create conflicts.
>
> In IBM APL2 and in GNU APL, the expression
>
> ⍺ (f g h) ⍵
>
> gives a 3 item vector with the items being ⍺,
Hi Alexey,
it actually does create conflicts.
In IBM APL2 and in GNU APL, the _expression_
⍺ (f g h) ⍵
gives a 3 item vector with the items being ⍺, (f g h),
and ⍵.
In Dyalog APL it gives (quote):
(⍺ f ⍵) g (⍺
Hi,
At first I also thought like this, but since it is already part of J
language and Dyalog APL, and it is not something alien but rather
invented by Ken Iverson himself, I believe it could be a part of language if it
does
not produce conflicts.
>From what I understood the general idea is to ha
Hi,
after looking at the examples in the Dyalog APL Programmer's
Guide,
I don't think that forks and trains are something that should be
added
to GNU APL.
In my opinion, one of the strengths of APL is its syntactic
simplicity,
