Choosing a comment of Dijkstra on APL is as valid having the creator of
COBOL comment on Ruby. It's just irrelevant.
Fair point. It's funny, though!
Sorry to be so negative about the language. I really haven't
looked into it much so I shouldn't be so harsh to judge. Didn't
fully understand the example, but I appreciated it, anyhow.
Point taken, however.
Though I may not (yet) dig using APL as a language to write
anything longer than one line, it is really good at many one-liners,
and certain things that require a lot of typing to say something
stupid could easily be abstracted into a more comprehensive
Array library, say. That's where array * :+ came from, and there
are probably more like it.
It only matters when the iterator (ãàÏÊnjectãà in this case)
passes more than two arguments to the block. ...right?
Yeah, right. I'm on crack, nevermind.
There are lots and lots and lots of examples. To choose
just one, Java overloads + non-commutatively for strings:
Yeah, okay, I'm still on crack.
It's not okay with me.
I'd much rather have the ãàãàoperator not perform any
truncation, and use ãà.div 2ãàto get integer division.
Ditto. Doesn't Pascal act like this?
One could use the original keyword like one uses the
super keyword.That's a great idea. I really like it. The idiom is so
common and ugly that it definitely could use some sugar.
Great! Now go write an RCR for me. :Q
Devin
I have no idea where my webmail gets all those funky "ãàãà"
characters from.