The APL Source Code (2012)

> But APL programs are often cryptic and hard to decode. Some have joked that it is a “write-only language” because even the author of a program might have trouble understanding it later.

So the original Perl?

Re: The APL Source Code (2012)

#5

Post by marcodiego » Tue, Dec 20, 2022, 12:34 PM UTC

> To access this material, you must agree to the terms of the license displayed here, which permits only non-commercial use and does not give you the right to license it to third parties by posting copies elsewhere on the web.

We have to agree to these kinds of terms about something that is more than half a century old and has zero commercial value. Something in the copyright system is deeply broken.

Re: The APL Source Code (2012)

#6

Post by melling » Tue, Dec 20, 2022, 12:45 PM UTC

xedrac wrote: post #4

> But APL programs are often cryptic and hard to decode. Some have joked that it is a “write-only language” because even the author of a program might have trouble understanding it later. So the original Perl?

Nope, not even close. I’ve written/read lots of Perl.

APL is a completely different paradigm.

Every now and then I get the urge to take a deep dive into APL or J but I really need a use case.

Since they are array languages they seem like they might be good for machine learning?

Re: The APL Source Code (2012)

#7

Post by eggy » Tue, Dec 20, 2022, 12:54 PM UTC

xedrac wrote: post #4

> But APL programs are often cryptic and hard to decode. Some have joked that it is a “write-only language” because even the author of a program might have trouble understanding it later. So the original Perl?

I actually find it way easier and shorter to review code I've written in J and APL, because it is so succinct and the symbols are well defined. Having to review something that is a paragraph or one page of code is much easier than following pages of other programming languages code. You can comment APL as you can in most PLs, and with the REPL-like dev environment, you can test pieces of code for verification quite immediately and easily. I love APL and J. I am currently using April [1]. APL in Lisp for the best of both worlds - the expressivity of APL (and Lisp), and the CL ecosystem for batteries included. The mix is always surprising.

  [1]  https://github.com/phantomics/april

Re: The APL Source Code (2012)

#8

Post by eggy » Tue, Dec 20, 2022, 12:56 PM UTC

melling wrote: post #6

xedrac wrote: post #4

> But APL programs are often cryptic and hard to decode. Some have joked that it is a “write-only language” because even the author of a program might have trouble understanding it later. So the original Perl?

Nope, not even close. I’ve written/read lots of Perl. APL is a completely different paradigm. Every now and then I get the urge to take a deep dive into APL or J but I really need a use case. Since they are array languages they seem like they might be good for machine learning?

Here's one paper on CNN's in APL: https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3315454.3329960

Re: The APL Source Code (2012)

#9

Post by leephillips » Tue, Dec 20, 2022, 12:57 PM UTC

I believe Einstein’s only notational innovation was the summation convention, which remains very popular. Am I wrong?

By the way, APL was the first language I learned, on the APL/360 system described here, using paper terminals.

Re: The APL Source Code (2012)

#10

Post by alaaalawi » Tue, Dec 20, 2022, 1:41 PM UTC

eggy wrote: post #7

xedrac wrote: post #4

> But APL programs are often cryptic and hard to decode. Some have joked that it is a “write-only language” because even the author of a program might have trouble understanding it later. So the original Perl?

I actually find it way easier and shorter to review code I've written in J and APL, because it is so succinct and the symbols are well defined. Having to review something that is a paragraph or one page of code is much easier than following pages of other programming languages code. You can comment APL as you can in most PLs, and with the REPL-like dev environment, you can test pieces of code for verification quite i…

we need just the correct expectations. APL is like mathematics for me. i need to read it several time to understand dense unfamiliar terms and formulas. same goes for APL. it is not the typical language which i assume can be read while driving