sam@kalessin.jpl.nasa.gov (Sam Sirlin) (01/19/91)
In article <15160014@hpdmd48.boi.hp.com>, rrr@hpdmd48.boi.hp.com (Rudi Rynders) writes: |> ... |> As for my suggestion of a text comparing APL and J: I still |> think it would be a good idea to have one to make the path to "J" |> a bit less thorny. The chances of "J" becoming popular will be a |> lot better with it than without it IMHO. I agree. From my own impressions, and correspondence here and on BBS\APL, even APLers have trouble with J. While some of this is undoubtedly our expectations (we're used to our symbol set), APLers must start out to be pretty tollerant of new symbol systems even to use APL. My guess is that BASIC or FORTRAN people will have much more trouble with J. Be that as it may, there's also alot of APL software written already (EISPACK, ODE solvers, controls analysis, graphics). If I start using J seriously, I don't want to write all my software over again, hence I'll (eventually) work on an APL -> J translator, probably in STSC APL. Right now, the hardest part of this seems like dealing with indexing, but I think I can do this. -- Sam Sirlin Jet Propulsion Laboratory sam@kalessin.jpl.nasa.gov