From e858f41dffaee272ffcf4b2cb63a49ad25ebf7d7 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Marshall Lochbaum Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2021 15:01:22 -0400 Subject: Highlight namespace dot as a separate token in md.bqn --- docs/doc/based.html | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) (limited to 'docs/doc/based.html') diff --git a/docs/doc/based.html b/docs/doc/based.html index ced213c8..36ce2af8 100644 --- a/docs/doc/based.html +++ b/docs/doc/based.html @@ -48,4 +48,4 @@

Versus the boxed array model

The boxed array model of SHARP APL, A+, and J is an inductive system like BQN's. But this model uses arrays as the base case: numeric and character arrays are the simplest kind of data allowed, and "a number" means a rank-0 numeric array. The inductive step is the array of boxes; as with numbers "a box" is simply a rank-0 array of boxes.

Numeric and character arrays in this system have depth 0. In general these correspond to arrays of depth 1 in BQN, but because there's no lower depth they are also used where BQN atoms would appear. For example, both Shape ($) and Length (#) return depth-0 results in J. For an array a with rank at least 1, the length #a is exactly [/ $ a, while the identical BQN code ⊣˝ ≢ a returns not ≠ a but < ≠ a. Like the nested model, the boxed model can hide depth issues that occur at lower depths but generally reveals them at higher depths.

-

The boundary at depth 0 will tend to cause inconsistencies and confusion in any array language, and boxed array languages push this boundary up a level. This leads to the programmer spending more effort managing boxes: for example, to reverse each list in a list of lists, the programmer can use reverse under open, |. &. >. But to find the lengths of each of these lists, # &. > would yield a boxed list, which is usually not wanted, so # @ > is needed instead. BQN shows that a system that doesn't require these distinctions is possible, as a BQN programmer would use ⌽¨ and ≠¨.

+

The boundary at depth 0 will tend to cause inconsistencies and confusion in any array language, and boxed array languages push this boundary up a level. This leads to the programmer spending more effort managing boxes: for example, to reverse each list in a list of lists, the programmer can use reverse under open, |. &. >. But to find the lengths of each of these lists, # &. > would yield a boxed list, which is usually not wanted, so # @ > is needed instead. BQN shows that a system that doesn't require these distinctions is possible, as a BQN programmer would use ⌽¨ and ≠¨.

-- cgit v1.2.3