RE: Lack of software abstractions

Joe Tibollo wrote:
> Using script files in J is a lot more difficult than using script
> files in VB.

On Linux?

VB has an advantage in the context of Windows:  it comes
pre-installed with the operating system and is integrated
with many aspects of the system.  I don't anticipate J
getting incorporated into Windows any time soon.

> Another big item for me is the debug environent. The APL or VB
> debugging environment is a pleasure to use.  I find the J debugger
> awkward to use.

Personally, I find J easier to debug than either APL (which I
do not have installed) or VB (which I rarely use).  I'll also
note that you've not specified which APL you are using.

I'll agree that J's debugger could be, at least in principle,
a debugging environment which takes greater advantage of
the context of the script and better integrates into the context
where the script is being used.
 
> Just one more rub - for some reason APL and J people are under
> some allusion that they have access to this magical language
> that allows them to avoid hundreds of line of coding with
> alternate languages.

Maybe some people have that point of view.  However, that does
not describe why I like J.

I like J because it lets me express many ideas (about programs
and their architecture) concisely.  I often find that I can
better solve some problems in other languages if I borrow from
J's approaches.  And, of course, sometimes it's just the best
tool for the job.  (Recent example: building a CSV file for
an intel engineer to use to drive load testing.)

> In other words I have spent years taking the concepts from
> J/APL and building functions to handle arrays or vectors in VB,
> C - and I am satisfied that I can work just as efficiently
> regardless of the language.

I'm in an analogous position to you.  However I move from one language
environment to another (and from one application domain to another)
rather frequently.  Thus, I cannot rely on building up a J-like
toolkit to address weaknesses in the utility of those other
environments.

> If we want to have an honest debate of what people find good or
> bad (easy or difficult) when using J then we need to listen a bit
> more and acknowledge a point when its made.  

Personally, I could care less about such debates.

I think those debates tell us more about the person than the language.

I do acknowledge that useful points can come out of a person's
reflections on how they work.  Sometimes.

-- 
Raul