it's a pity I can't golf in NARS2000

Why can't you?

unicode

Can't you just use the encoding scheme?

for example it has ‼ which is combinatorial operators

@Zacharý huh

unicode is it's encoding

@EriktheOutgolfer Maybe I can make a version of SBCS for NARS.

I mean using Dyalog Classic encoding scheme

@Zacharý nope, I can't do that, how would it be readable for NARS then?

and it also has ⍥, which is composition (er, L f⍥g R == (gL)f(gR), not compose)

I mean counting the bytes in Dyalog Classic

@Adám most probably, it doesn't really use over 100-something different unicode chars

You have a bunch of proposals for Dyalog.

@Zacharý because they need to take their time? rushing is only counter-productive

@Adám and I think you'll love ⊙, it's called "Null" in nars, and it's used for forcing the hybrids (/⌿\⍀) to act as functions

Ah, I see

now, what nars doesn't have is as much quad-stuff as Dyalog

@EriktheOutgolfer I know about it, but I find it breaks normal syntax. It is kind-of a hyperator, but postfix. Also, I wouldn't want to waste a primitive just to disambiguate four other primitives. I have a much more applicable proposal: f⍤g is atop f g ⍵ and f ⍺ g ⍵. Then you can force hybrids into functions with ⊢⍤/ etc.

@EriktheOutgolfer Because it is intended as a Nested Array Research System, not a production or application language.

@Adám you can find NARS's features here. some of them may not be really necessary, such as pi literals for example

but others such as roots are useful (Dyalog's *∘2⍣¯1 is NARS's monadic √)

@EriktheOutgolfer Right. We still have a lot of potential extensions to APL. But as you said, rushing isn't good. We want to make sure that what we add is as perfect as can be. (And we still make mistakes/inconsistencies.)

@EriktheOutgolfer Uh, *∘.5

@EriktheOutgolfer But yes, I agree that √ is useful. My only gripe with it is that the order of arguments is reversed compared to *.

@EriktheOutgolfer Huh, NARS trains are like J trains, not like Dyalog trains.

@Adám only for square root

@EriktheOutgolfer Dyadic (i.e. general root) is *∘÷.

@Adám nobody said you can't change the order of the arguments! ;)

@Adám well, it depends on the precision of your reciprocal though :p

@EriktheOutgolfer That would be as confusing as changing the order of - and ÷ (which really should be reversed, but for math-legacy reasons are as they are).

@EriktheOutgolfer Not necessarily. The interpreter recognises some compositions and uses special code for them.

let's call our new root function ∆

Nth root of M in NARS2000 is N√M

@EriktheOutgolfer You mean ∆←*∘÷⍨ ?

@Adám maybe without the ⍨ though, so as to match the order of arguments with *'s

@EriktheOutgolfer Right, ok. What are you getting at?