Newsgroups: comp.lang.apl
Path: watmath!watserv2.uwaterloo.ca!torn!cs.utexas.edu!uwm.edu!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu!news.cso.uiuc.edu!mm-mac20.mse.uiuc.edu!gaylord
From: Richard J. Gaylord <gaylord@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu>
Subject: learning  apl and j
Message-ID: <BwvqCp.KFC@news.cso.uiuc.edu>
X-Xxdate: Thu, 29 Oct 92 04:56:13 GMT
Sender: usenet@news.cso.uiuc.edu (Net Noise owner)
X-Useragent: Nuntius v1.1.1d12
Organization: University of Illinois
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1992 10:55:37 GMT
X-Xxmessage-Id: <A7151F6D61029B14@mm-mac20.mse.uiuc.edu>
Lines: 49

not to flame or cause onyone to flame out, here's my thoughts on  apl and
j texts andon getting these languages to prosper:

ken iverson's spiral bound manuals for j are very nice looking. i also am
enjoying them now since i'm taking a better attitude towards them then i
did before [ie., i quit bitchingabout what his books are not and i'm
focusing on using them to learn about j]

however they have two problems:

(1) although iverson says it is important to know how to read a language
in order to learn out to write it [and i agree], ironically his j books
require you to be sitting at a computer while you read them because there
are exercises with no solutions given. i want to be able to read a book
wherever i am . even if i have a pocket computer, i don't want to be
staring at a screen or punching keys while i'm trying to read and think
about what i'm reading. [ i confess that i think that the idea that print
books (and newspapers) will be replaced by electronic books is
ridiculous, even if a hypertext style is used ].

(2) the j books really only show code fragements illustrating  functions
and operators [this is also true of most apl books]. there is little code
given for more complicated programs [like the game of life or neural nets
or other interesting things]. since the literature of j and even apl, is
pretty sparse, it is difficult to find examples of real programs [its one
of the reasons i like smillie's statistics and j paper]. 

this is also a bit ironic since iverson says [and i emphatically agree] 
that the language determines how one thinks.  what is needed is examples
of using j and apl to solve non-one line problems [ i love one-liners but
many problems require more than just one-liner programs]

actually i don't really care that much about apl or j or even
mathematica. what i care about is the "apl way of thinking' which i think
is terrific and i think it is even better done in j [array manuipulation
and functional programming are a natural fit]. i want to see examples of
this way of looking  problems. 

finally, to contribute to another thread in this group, , if you want to
know the state of health of any language just go to the bookstore and
check out the books written in or about the language. we all know what it
says about apl and j. 

tutorials and conferences and technical articles and netgroups just don't
reach enough people. there needs to be books written in about apl and j
[with  good code showing how to solve problems people want to solve] if
these languages are going to stay alive of come alive. perhaps people who
want to maintain or improve the health of their language of choice should
write a book on that language [that's what i'm doing].
