/prog/ - APL should be revived.

Name: Anonymous 2012-01-08 2:16

"APL is like a beautiful diamond - flawless, beautifully symmetrical." -Joel Moses

We have shit like Java, SEPPLES, and Haskell. Really? What is this BULLSHIT?

Take a moment to stare in awe at this beauty:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/APL_%28programming_language%29#Syntax

I just came.

Name: Anonymous 2012-01-08 2:34

APL looks like Perl. Fail to see, how it is better than Lisp.

Name: Anonymous 2012-01-08 2:35

"APL is a mistake, carried through to perfection. It is the language of the future for the programming techniques of the past: it creates a new generation of coding bums" -Dijkstra

Name: Anonymous 2012-01-08 2:52

>>3
Spoken by a man who created one of the worst languages of all time.

Name: Anonymous 2012-01-08 2:54

2012 - The year of APL

Name: Anonymous 2012-01-08 2:57

>>4
Together with John McCarthy and a bunch of other jews.

Name: Anonymous 2012-01-08 2:57

Lisp is a mistake, carried through to perfection. It is the cdrs of the future for the cars of the past: it creates a new generation of coding bums and /prog/ is their sanctuary

Name: Anonymous 2012-01-08 4:33

you might want to look into the J language? i haven't used it but it is descended from apl, i think

Name: Anonymous 2012-01-08 5:09

>>8

Haven't used it myself, but a friend of mine is into it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J_(programming_language)

It look neat.

Name: Anonymous 2012-01-08 8:35

GC is shit.

Name: Anonymous 2012-01-08 17:29

How am I supposed to type this shit? UIM/Windows-IME?

Name: Anonymous 2012-01-08 17:43

With Uchigatana.

Name: Anonymous 2012-01-08 18:47

>>8
quicksort=: (($:@(<#[) , (=#[) , $:@(>#[)) ({~ ?@#)) ^: (1<#)
Jesus fucking Christ.

Name: Anonymous 2012-01-08 19:07

>>13

It's beautiful!

Name: Anonymous 2012-01-08 19:48

>>10
The APL GC is fast enough to run on the IBM 5110, which used an interpreter running on a 32-bit S/360 emulator running on a subscalar microcoded 16-bit processor.

Name: Anonymous 2012-01-08 23:57

I would fully support a rebirth of an APL implementation that supported true functional programing with first class functions and lambdas as well a good Object System (im thinking like Scala)

Name: Anonymous 2012-01-09 0:40

>>16

It will be done, with or without your support!

Name: Anonymous 2012-01-09 0:55

>>13
>$:@(<#[

Looks like piggy standing on back legs. Kawaii, ne?

Name: Anonymous 2012-01-09 1:13

>>18

I peed.

Name: Anonymous 2012-01-09 2:13

one thing that is really needed for an APL like language to make a comeback is more intelligent keyboards. we have unicode now, but not a nice way to get at those characters.

you might have seen existing tech like http://www.artlebedev.com/everything/optimus/ but imagine if a keyboard was like a touchscreen that could define arbitrary keys, but wasn't flat. it could raise up keys out of the touchscreen substance, so you could get the nice tactile feel of physical keys.

if you look at the way languages are designed, they are more or less restricted to the character set stuck on our keyboards due to historical reasons.
" ' | \ / : ; , . / ? <> [] {} () - = _ + ! @ # $ % ^ & * ~

how sweet would it be if we had easy access (easy access meaning they are directly represented on a key, not via a key chord macro or character map program) to other characters?

 set operations ∀ ∈ ⊂ ...

logic ⋀ ⋁ ...

actual lambda symbol λ rather than keyword "lambda"

etc etc

Name: Anonymous 2012-01-09 2:42

>>20
There was that Russian OLED keyboard. 90x90 pixels under every key or something like that.

Name: Anonymous 2012-01-09 2:46

>>20
Try using X. You can enable the compose key and configure the sequences however you like.

Name: Anonymous 2012-01-09 2:46

>>21
i linked to it. imo, it's nice (altho too expensive) but isn't futuristic enough

Name: Anonymous 2012-01-09 2:51

>>20
I agree. It's nice. Now to get the money and motivation behind it.

Name: Anonymous 2012-01-09 11:20

>>22
(S)He said (s)he doesn't want a character map program, for whatever retarded unthinkable reason that might be.

Name: Anonymous 2012-01-09 11:40

>>8
J looks like shit. The character set is half of what makes APL such a great language. NARS2000 has the trains and numerical tower of J with the syntax and character set of APL.

Name: Anonymous 2012-01-10 0:24

>>5
2012 - The year of APL
QFT

Name: Anonymous 2012-01-10 6:32

APL is unreadable shit, amazingly worse than Lisp.

Name: Anonymous 2012-01-10 6:40

>>28
CHALLENGE: design C header apl.h which would provide the same level of obfuscation as APL.

Name: Anonymous 2012-01-10 8:38

>>29

#ifndef _APL_H

#define _APL_H

#include <void.h>

#endif

Name: Anonymous 2012-01-10 9:49

>>30
_APL_H is a reserved identifier.

Name: Anonymous 2012-01-10 10:27

>>31
So is _bool but that did not stop the C committee
from preventing identifier collisions therefore
blessing us with _Bool [i]![/i]

Name: Anonymous 2012-01-10 12:27

>>32
No, _bool is not a reserved identifier. Identifiers with a single leading underscore is only reserved if the first letter following the underscore is capitalized, all identifiers with two leading underscores are reserved.

Name: Anonymous 2012-01-10 14:15

>>33
nice _Doubles

Name: Anonymous 2012-01-15 0:39

2012 - THE YEAR OF APL

Name: Anonymous 2012-01-15 7:52

>>35
1989-2012
The era of reserved identifiers.

APL should be revived.

1 Name: Anonymous 2012-01-08 2:16

2 Name: Anonymous 2012-01-08 2:34

3 Name: Anonymous 2012-01-08 2:35

4 Name: Anonymous 2012-01-08 2:52

5 Name: Anonymous 2012-01-08 2:54

6 Name: Anonymous 2012-01-08 2:57

7 Name: Anonymous 2012-01-08 2:57

8 Name: Anonymous 2012-01-08 4:33

9 Name: Anonymous 2012-01-08 5:09

10 Name: Anonymous 2012-01-08 8:35

11 Name: Anonymous 2012-01-08 17:29

12 Name: Anonymous 2012-01-08 17:43

13 Name: Anonymous 2012-01-08 18:47

14 Name: Anonymous 2012-01-08 19:07

15 Name: Anonymous 2012-01-08 19:48

16 Name: Anonymous 2012-01-08 23:57

17 Name: Anonymous 2012-01-09 0:40

18 Name: Anonymous 2012-01-09 0:55

19 Name: Anonymous 2012-01-09 1:13

20 Name: Anonymous 2012-01-09 2:13

21 Name: Anonymous 2012-01-09 2:42

22 Name: Anonymous 2012-01-09 2:46

23 Name: Anonymous 2012-01-09 2:46

24 Name: Anonymous 2012-01-09 2:51

25 Name: Anonymous 2012-01-09 11:20

26 Name: Anonymous 2012-01-09 11:40

27 Name: Anonymous 2012-01-10 0:24

28 Name: Anonymous 2012-01-10 6:32

29 Name: Anonymous 2012-01-10 6:40

30 Name: Anonymous 2012-01-10 8:38

31 Name: Anonymous 2012-01-10 9:49

32 Name: Anonymous 2012-01-10 10:27

33 Name: Anonymous 2012-01-10 12:27

34 Name: Anonymous 2012-01-10 14:15

35 Name: Anonymous 2012-01-15 0:39

36 Name: Anonymous 2012-01-15 7:52

Name: Anonymous 2012-01-08 2:16

Name: Anonymous 2012-01-08 2:34

Name: Anonymous 2012-01-08 2:35

Name: Anonymous 2012-01-08 2:52

Name: Anonymous 2012-01-08 2:54

Name: Anonymous 2012-01-08 2:57

Name: Anonymous 2012-01-08 2:57

Name: Anonymous 2012-01-08 4:33

Name: Anonymous 2012-01-08 5:09

Name: Anonymous 2012-01-08 8:35

Name: Anonymous 2012-01-08 17:29

Name: Anonymous 2012-01-08 17:43

Name: Anonymous 2012-01-08 18:47

Name: Anonymous 2012-01-08 19:07

Name: Anonymous 2012-01-08 19:48

Name: Anonymous 2012-01-08 23:57

Name: Anonymous 2012-01-09 0:40

Name: Anonymous 2012-01-09 0:55

Name: Anonymous 2012-01-09 1:13

Name: Anonymous 2012-01-09 2:13

Name: Anonymous 2012-01-09 2:42

Name: Anonymous 2012-01-09 2:46

Name: Anonymous 2012-01-09 2:46

Name: Anonymous 2012-01-09 2:51

Name: Anonymous 2012-01-09 11:20

Name: Anonymous 2012-01-09 11:40

Name: Anonymous 2012-01-10 0:24

Name: Anonymous 2012-01-10 6:32

Name: Anonymous 2012-01-10 6:40

Name: Anonymous 2012-01-10 8:38

Name: Anonymous 2012-01-10 9:49

Name: Anonymous 2012-01-10 10:27

Name: Anonymous 2012-01-10 12:27

Name: Anonymous 2012-01-10 14:15

Name: Anonymous 2012-01-15 0:39

Name: Anonymous 2012-01-15 7:52