skruger
Joined 10 years ago
Karma
511
Submissions
102
Member since
Dec 6
Recent submissions
Comment · 3 months ago
Cormac McCarthy gets my vote.
Comment · 3 months ago
The 'unit of thought' thing is a nod to the Ken Iverson paper on APL that won him the Turing Award ("Notation as a Tool of Thought"), also referenced by Dyalog's tag line "The tool of thought for software solutions"). Variations of that phrase are endemic in the array languages space.
Comment · 5 months ago
It has a huge RoI, even if you never use it in anger. It’s a bit like Lisp in that regard — it shapes your thinking.
Comment · 5 months ago
A more concise intro to APL for the modern era: https://xpqz.github.io/learnapl
(author)
Comment · 9 months ago
I faced exactly this situation a few years ago - I went with APL as the “OG”, but it probably doesn’t matter that much. Learning k or j once you know APL is much easier. I wrote a bit about this (apl and k)
Comment · 9 months ago
It makes parsing tricky. But for the programmer it’s rarely an issue, as typically definitions are physically close. Some variants like BQN avoids this ambiguity by imposing a naming scheme (function names upper case, array names lower case or similar).
Comment · 9 months ago
Yes, it's either an array (if A, B and C are arrays), a function derived via the dyadic operator B, with operands A and C being either arrays or functions, a dyadic function call of the dyadic function B (A and C are arrays), or the sequential monadic application of functions A and B to array C, or a derived function as the tacit fork (A, B and C are functions). Did I miss anything?
Comment · 9 months ago
Whilst LLMs still perform weakly in APL, the situation is improving at pace, and giving it a “skill” to evaluate code makes a dramatic difference. I gave a conference talk about it recently (video): https://youtu.be/H_wdKeJ8gt4
Comment · 1 year ago
Comment · 1 year ago
QinetiQ?
<https://xpqz.github.io/learnapl>
<https://xpqz.github.io/cultivations>
<https://xpqz.github.io/kbook>