Jay Criticisms

JayLanguage is a brilliant next step from KenIverson's AplLanguage. But while it is a mind-expanding language (in the greatest sense; even though you've programmed in C/C++/Pascal/Smalltalk/Java for many years, J will reduce you to feeling like an overwhelmed college student), it has some significant flaws as a language and implementation:

Language:

Implementation:


Why do these array languages tend to use so many symbols instead of MeaningfulName s? What would happen if it was given a more functional syntax?
Why do these array languages tend to use so many symbols instead of MeaningfulName s? What would happen if it was given a more functional syntax?

They use symbols for the same reason simple algebra uses symbols -- it's concise, to the point, written-language independent, and once you get the hang of it, fairly easy to read. The real question is why they don't advocate proper spacing rules, which turns an infix expression into BaudBarf. Just you try to write the quadratic formula in a functional style using MeaningfulNames. You have to impose some algebraic notation if you want to strike any kind of balance between intent, meaning, and conciseness.

{A compromise is to use very short names, say up the three letters. Or, at least allow the names as an alternative to symbols.}


EditText of this page (last edited January 6, 2014) or FindPage with title or text search