« first day (901 days earlier)      last day (2050 days later) » 

Adám
Adám
06:39
Good news: Preparation of FinnAPL idiom list for inclusion in APLcart is now over half way done.
 
6 hours later…
Feeds
Feeds
12:39
twitter.com/dyalogapl/status/1150744148330393600
 
1 hour later…
J. Sallé
J. Sallé
14:01
Thanks @ngn @Adám @dzaima for the help with the scan thing
Paul Mansour
Paul Mansour
14:50
If APL evaluated 2 3 4 + 2 null 4 as 4 null 8, what would be the argument for not returning 2 6 null as the result of 2 3 4 + 2 3?
dzaima
dzaima
@PaulMansour because giving errors is good, there are a couple orders of magnitude less times that'd be useful (from the already incredibly few for nulls) and a couple orders of magnitude more cases when that'd be explicitly very very horrible
(a completely pointless point, but what about 1 2 3 + ,2? In Dyalog, because history, that vectorizes the two, but it'd be ambiguous now with null extending)
Paul Mansour
Paul Mansour
Agreed. I assume by "incredibly few" you mean the few primitives that would return null given non-null arguments (like 0 divided 0)?
But then every primitive has to handle nulls in some way, many of which will not lead to errors, because that is the point. No?
dzaima
dzaima
@PaulMansour I meant in general useful, I see nulls as being pointless, and besides some performance edge-cases, I don't think they should exist (as a global setting, at least. opt-in would be kind of okay-ish, but APL really isn't suited for that).
Paul Mansour
Paul Mansour
Got it.
Please let's not have a setting for it!
 
4 hours later…
J. Sallé
J. Sallé
18:53
@Adám, can you remind me of how to ⎕S for multiple strings? (if it's possible, I think it is)
dzaima
dzaima
@J.Sallé just have an array of strings as the left operand?
J. Sallé
J. Sallé
@dzaima I thought that was it too, but it's not exactly what I need, unless I'm doing something wrong
Adám
Adám
@J.Sallé So what do you need? 
⎕←'you' '\w+'⎕S'\u0' '&'⊢'can you remind me'
Dyalog APL
Dyalog APL 
@Adám
┌───┬───┬──────┬──┐
│can│YOU│remind│me│
└───┴───┴──────┴──┘
J. Sallé
J. Sallé
Let me see if I can illustrate it: If I do something like 'a' 'b'⎕S'&'⊢'abc a b c', it returns 'ab' instead of 'abc' 'a' 'b'
I need the latter rather than the former
Adám
Adám
18:58
@J.Sallé You need to ravel each. Remember that 'a' 'b'≡'ab'
@DyalogAPL This is one of those cases where my " syntax would be nice.
J. Sallé
J. Sallé
Ah, I knew there was a trick I was forgetting
dzaima
dzaima
@Adám oh, you've thought of it too?
or am i forgetting that i got it from you. it's been a while since i got here
Adám
Adám
@dzaima My idea is that "abc" is ⊂,'abc' while "abc" "def" is 'abc' 'def' and "a" "b" is ,¨'ab'. I'm not sure if dzaima/APL agrees.
It doesn't solve all issues, but it does take care of a large swath of them.
dzaima
dzaima
@Adám ah, my idea is that "anything" is ,'that same anything' (except escaping - maybe " could also allow for traditional escape sequences?)
Adám
Adám
@dzaima Yeah, I thought of the escaping too, and that might be good, but it is orthogonal, and so not my focus.
@dzaima Hm, ,'that same thing' — is that the same thing as mine?
dzaima
dzaima
19:05
@Adám you have an additional ⊂ after that
Adám
Adám
@dzaima Right, I have ⊆ after that.
dzaima
dzaima
@Adám I don't like that that breaks how strands work (what would ("ab") "cd" be?)
Adám
Adám
So any time you have "something", you have consistent depth of 2.
@dzaima Yeah, I thought about that too. That one in particular is no problem, though; it is (⊂'ab')(⊂'cd')
dzaima
dzaima
@Adám or you could have constant depth 1, and not break into strands
Adám
Adám
@dzaima No, because I wanted to solve the oft-repeated issue: 'list 'of' 'words'⍳'words' with "list" "of" "words"⍳"words"
dzaima
dzaima
19:12
@Adám imo that's just a problem of how ⍳ works and that in APL having a built-in for ⍳∘⊂ would be unheard of. it also continues teaching the wrong fact that arrOfE ⍳ E for any E works (while that'd only be true for "-strings and simple scalars)
Adám
Adám
@dzaima Right. ⊆⍵ is actually slightly problematic too, as it teaches that …f⊆… solves your problems, but what if I need the depth to be at least 3?
dzaima
dzaima
i should mention that I don't like ⊆ either
Adám
Adám
@dzaima My fault. I insisted it be added :-(
For a while, I had a campaign for that as my email signature.
dzaima
dzaima
well it does solve a problem, but my thinking is that the problem should've been solved deeper down (but that sadly probably isn't possible without breaking everything)
J. Sallé
J. Sallé
I think I'm reiventing the wheel multiple times over, but I want to finish this answer before I post it here for you guys to see, so I have another question: Is there a way to guarantee ⌸'s ⍺ to always be in the same order? Is grading the argument the only way?
Adám
Adám
19:23
@J.Sallé I usually prepend the ordered elements to ⍵, then subtract one from the counts/remove the first index.
J. Sallé
J. Sallé
Ah, that's clever actually hahahah
didn't think it could be solved so simply, but it makes sense
Adám
Adám
@J.Sallé Iverson actually originally had two editions of the function (it wasn't an operator yet), one that maintained order, and one that sorted.
J. Sallé
J. Sallé
Smart, Mr. Iverson! I wonder why it didn't catch, though ⍨
I don't think your solution is gonna work for me though. ASCII art challenges are a pain in this case
I'll just sort the result of ⎕S, I guess
Actually I can't do that either because ascii art again ugh
 
1 hour later…
Adám
Adám
20:33
@user9791370 Hello. Interested in APL?

« first day (901 days earlier)      last day (2050 days later) »