Hi Jürgen:
Thanks for your usual gracious reply. I understand the points you present.
Perhaps my perspective is too narrow? The way I see it the key “module” is the
interpreter of the language.
IMHO display of the results, means to enter and store data of various types,
providing an environment
Hi,
I can't speak about java. In my (previous) work life I have used
about 15 different languages at
different times and for different purposes. I have not seen a
single language that is suitable for
all purposes, so I normally try to understand a pro
Hi,
I have not looked into Dyalogs implementation myself, but if they
have it then we should aim at being as compatible as it makes
sense.
No problem if some of their capabilities are not supported (please
avoid
going over the top in the GNU APL
Hi Peter,
I mostly agree with your concerns. As you may have noticed, I
already regretted some of the things that I implemented earlier
in GNU APL. On the other hand, you also see on the GNU APL mailing
list the proposals of other GNU APL users to implement
I did not know this. I took a look at Dyalog's API and it's not possible to
implement it fully, as it relies on their object oriented features.
However, the basic functionality wouldn't be hard to replicate, if that is
something that is desired.
Jürgen, what is your opinion on this?
On 22 Septemb
+1
On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 9:19 PM, Peter Teeson
wrote:
> It so happens that 2 of my former colleagues from I.P.Sharp came visiting
> today and we were chatting about this.
> Ken was not in favour of making APL complicated. When I worked at IPSA my
> office was next to Ken’s
> and when someone
FYI Dyalog has operators ⎕S (search) and ⎕R (replace) which are implemented
with PCRE:
('[Aa]..'⎕S'&')'Dyalog APL'
┌───┬───┐
│alo│APL│
└───┴───┘
('red' 'green'⎕R'green' 'blue')'red orange yellow green blue'
green orange yellow blue blue
http://help.dyalog.com/16.0/Content/Language/Sys
I made the changes needed to use UTF-32 instead. It turned out that the
PCRE version 1 API I was using does not properly support UTF-32 patterns
(only match data). Thus, I changed the code to use version 2 instead.
I have attached the two files that I changed. It works, as can be seen in
the below
