« first day (1090 days earlier)      last day (35 days later) » 

ngn
12:03 AM
@Bubbler you can pass a function to another "function" (though it's called an operator) - but you can't pass an operator to an operator (i mean of the same kind, e.g. mop to a mop)
so, that's just pushing the problem to the next level in the function/mop/dop hierarchy
 
@ngn A mop has different type from a function, so it's not a problem. But the true problem is we can't pass an op to anything (which gives rise of hyperators)
 
ngn
@Bubbler well, if hyperators could take other hyperators as hyperands.. :)
they would be the thing we call functions in functional programming
 
Dec 24 '19 at 14:48, by Adám
But then again, who really needs superators and ultrarators? See also dfns.notes.hyperators.
 
ngn
12:20 AM
wouldn't it be simpler to allow functions as first-class objects, instead of going through this circular reasoning?
or stop advertising apl as a functional programming language
@Adám typo in dfns.notes.hyperators: "worspace"
 
 
1 hour later…
1:26 AM
Hmm.
We should (re-)think about the syntax then
 
2:00 AM
And even if we admit that APL isn't a true functional language like Haskell, we can claim that it supports functional paradigm, like Python and JS do.
 
ngn
@Bubbler sure, but that doesn't mean much
js is actually a scheme in disguise :) the story goes that Brendan Eich initially wanted to put scheme in netscape but management specifically requested something with a c-like syntax, so it looks familiar to c/java programmers
 
2:18 AM
I imagine, if we get away from the current "tacit" programs and the parsing rule dedicated to operators, and mark every (possibly higher-level) function as either monadic or dyadic, we could have a functional language that supports basic APL syntax.
Though we'd need to experiment how many parens we'll need
 
ngn
@Bubbler designing the syntax is the easy part. persuading dyalog is harder.
 
@ngn I don't believe Dyalog will accept it anyway, and I don't think it can be called APL either. At best it'll be an APL derivative.
 
ngn
@Bubbler apl doesn't have a strict definition (there's an apl2 spec which costs money, but it's largely ignored anyway)
i don't think apl+namespaces should be called apl either..
some people wouldn't even consider dfns to be apl
 
 
5 hours later…
7:40 AM
@ngn I need to move dfns to GitHub…
 
 
2 hours later…
ngn
9:56 AM
@Adám isn't it a ws (i.e. not source code)?
 
10:10 AM
@ngn It is a ws. So?
 
ngn
@Adám well, you know, it's a binary blob, can't be diffed.. there's not much use putting it under version control
 
@ngn I'm converting it to one text file per item, and then "building" the ws from those files.
 
ngn
@Adám in that case it makes sense. the ws is just a build artefact.
 
Yup. This is already the case with the conga ws.
 
ngn
cool
 

« first day (1090 days earlier)      last day (35 days later) »