liebtag@stlvm20.vnet.ibm.com ("David Liebtag") (05/17/91)
Pat Monardo, Any argument that concludes that ANY language has no value on the basis of how difficult it is to multiply the values in the rows of a matrix by the values in a vector is patently absurd. Regards, David Liebtag
monardo@cshl.org (Pat Monardo) (05/18/91)
In article <9105171506.AA23991@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU> liebtag@stlvm20.vnet.ibm.com ("David Liebtag") writes: >Pat Monardo, > > Any argument that concludes that ANY language has no value on the >basis of how difficult it is to multiply the values in the rows >of a matrix by the values in a vector is patently absurd. > true. i should have said has no value to me. i also believe that the rank operator is a wonderful invention, up there in the top ten computer inventions of all time.
rbe@yrloc.ipsa.reuter.COM (Robert Bernecky) (05/18/91)
In article <9105171506.AA23991@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU> liebtag@stlvm20.vnet.ibm.com ("David Liebtag") writes: >Pat Monardo, > > Any argument that concludes that ANY language has no value on the >basis of how difficult it is to multiply the values in the rows >of a matrix by the values in a vector is patently absurd. Dave, you have HIT the nail on the head! As you clearly point out, the Real Problem is how to apply an arbitrary function to arbitrary subsets of an array. Let's see how different languages address this issue. Bob Robert Bernecky rbe@yrloc.ipsa.reuter.com bernecky@itrchq.itrc.on.ca Snake Island Research Inc (416) 368-6944 FAX: (416) 360-4694 18 Fifth Street, Ward's Island Toronto, Ontario M5J 2B9 Canada
monardo@cshl.org (Pat Monardo) (05/18/91)
In article <1991May18.043951.926@yrloc.ipsa.reuter.COM> rbe@yrloc.ipsa.reuter.COM (Robert Bernecky) writes: >In article <9105171506.AA23991@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU> liebtag@stlvm20.vnet.ibm.com ("David Liebtag") writes: >>Pat Monardo, >> >> Any argument that concludes that ANY language has no value on the >>basis of how difficult it is to multiply the values in the rows >>of a matrix by the values in a vector is patently absurd. > >Dave, you have HIT the nail on the head! As you clearly point out, >the Real Problem is how to apply an arbitrary function to arbitrary >subsets of an array. Let's see how different languages address this >issue. > actually i was being nice because i knew i was too harsh. but i do see a bit of irony in David's message since we ARE talking about APL. I think it is fair to critize an array language on how well it can deal with array subsets (as i think Bob is saying). And APL is the best one i know about. I know about S, which is almost as good as basic APL for array processing. In fact i use S all the time. S is a good replacement for standard APL. But give me a system with rank, merge, and from and i'd love it.