Simplifying array processing languages

ABSTRACT

A language like APL was a masterpiece of simplification when seen through the eyes of a computer user of the seventies. The virtues of simplicity are usually held to be many.This paper firstly discusses simplicity in general, reviews some of the writing on simplicity coming from the computing world, and briefly construes the development of APL, and the later J, as being essentially efforts in simplification. Possibilities for further simplification are then canvassed.Firstly, simplification of the usually accepted but unfortunate naming conventions adopted by array processing languages is proposed. Secondly, simplification of the arithmetic is very briefly outlined, more detailed treatment of this topic being available elsewhere. Thirdly, syntactic means for having all functions and operations dyadic are treated, and the advantages of adopting such means evaluated. Fourthly, the possibilities for a newly distinctive kind of function (called extractions) are described. These are considered as a kind of systematic renaming to supply arguments to functions. Fifthly, and in the context of J's simplifications, the need for hyperoperators is asserted. Finally, the nature of interpreters for array processing languages is reviewed, and suggestions made for facilities to be provided by such interpreters to aid the process of developing array processing code.

REFERENCES

• 1: Roger K. W. Hui , Kenneth E. Iverson , Eugene E. McDonnell, Tacit definition, ACM SIGAPL APL Quote Quad, v.21 n.4, p.202-211, Aug. 1991
• 2: M. GARDNER (1969). Simplicity as a scientific concept, Scientific American, Vol.221, No.5, pp.l 18-121.
• 3: Niklaus Wirth, A Plea for Lean Software, Computer, v.28 n.2, p.64-68, February 1995 [doi>10.1109/2.348001]
• 4: Alexander D. Stoyen, Fighting Complexity in Computer Systems, Computer, v.30 n.8, p.47-48, August 1997 [doi>10.1109/MC.1997.607062]
• 5: A.D. FALKOFF and K.E. IVERSON (1973). The Design of APL, IBM Journal of Research and Development, Vol. 17, No.4, pp.324-334.
• 6: James A. Brown , Brent Hawks , Ray Trimble, Extending the APL character set, ACM SIGAPL APL Quote Quad, v.24 n.1, p.41-46, Aug. 1993
• 7: Muhammad F. Mudawwar, Multicode: A Truly Multilingual Approach to Text Encoding, Computer, v.30 n.4, p.37-43, April 1997 [doi>10.1109/2.585152]
• 8: Roger K. W. Hui , Kenneth E. Iverson, TAGS: trains, agendas, and gerunds, ACM SIGAPL APL Quote Quad, v.25 n.1, p.74-77, Sept. 1994
• 9: Neville Holmes, Converging on Program Simplicity, Computer, v.30 n.12, p.136-135, December 1997
• 10: W. Neville Holmes, Composite Arithmetic: Proposal for a New Standard, Computer, v.30 n.3, p.65-73, March 1997 [doi>10.1109/2.573666]
• 11: Neville Holmes , Colin Hallam, The philosophy of nothing and everything, ACM SIGAPL APL Quote Quad, v.25 n.4, p.75-82, June 1995
• 12: W.N. HOLMES (1978). Is APL a programming language ?, The Computer Journal, Vol.21, No.2, pp.128-131.
• 13: Neville Holmes, Programming with Fortran, ACM SIGPLAN Fortran Forum, v.14 n.1, p.29-33, March 1995 [doi>10.1145/203594.203599]
• 14: John K. Ousterhout, Scripting: Higher-Level Programming for the 21st Century, Computer, v.31 n.3, p.23-30, March 1998 [doi>10.1109/2.660187]

INDEX TERMS

Primary Classification:
  F. Theory of Computation
  F.3 LOGICS AND MEANINGS OF PROGRAMS

Additional Classification:
  F. Theory of Computation
  F.2 ANALYSIS OF ALGORITHMS AND PROBLEM COMPLEXITY

General Terms:
Design, Languages