Re: A Question About Directive [off-topic]
- To: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net
- Subject: [mg111292] Re: A Question About Directive [off-topic]
- From: Murray Eisenberg <murray at math.umass.edu>
- Date: Mon, 26 Jul 2010 06:39:14 -0400 (EDT)
No, not really! As with nearly any programming language, it's possible to write nearly inscrutable code -- even with Mathematica. In APL, lots of folks did, and may still do, try to write "one-liners" and use cryptic names for variables and functions. But lots of APL code, even though very, very terse, could be, and is, very readable -- if you know the language! In fact, one reason for APL's popularity, and continued use, is that the developer can throw together a prototype quickly. And modify the prototype until the results meet the client's ever-changing need. "Read-never" could hardly be the case with such code that one needs to modify and otherwise maintain frequently. The "write-once, read-never" designation is thus to some extent a slander perpetrated by people who did not bother to learn the (very descriptive) symbols, syntax, or semantics, or who were unable or unwilling to do the higher-level thinking involved in manipulating entire arrays at once. On 7/25/2010 2:00 AM, AES wrote: > In article<i2eadd$q1l$1 at smc.vnet.net>, > Murray Eisenberg<murray at math.umass.edu> wrote: > >> Fewer keystrokes is not the sole metric for simplicity! Code readability >> is another. > > Agreed! > > Wasn't APL the classic example of a language with near-minimum > keystrokes, near-maximum unreadability? -- such that APL programs were > sometimes characterized as "write once, read never". > -- Murray Eisenberg murray at math.umass.edu Mathematics & Statistics Dept. Lederle Graduate Research Tower phone 413 549-1020 (H) University of Massachusetts 413 545-2859 (W) 710 North Pleasant Street fax 413 545-1801 Amherst, MA 01003-9305