[Jprogramming] The Ambiguous Dictionary
bob therriault
bobtherriault at mac.com
Wed Feb 3 02:48:53 HKT 2010
Thanks Roger,
I had been thinking about using + (plus) as well because it can generalize as a template to other arithmetic 0 rank dyadic verbs. Your examples provide a starting point for the concepts. I'll see what I can come up with.
Thanks for the information that = (self classify) may not be the most efficient approach for the machine, but pedagogically there may be conceptual advantages to giving the learner a single step solution, compared to the i.~ which would require an explanation of adverbs as well. Once again I am finding the fastest way to learn is to teach (or attempt to teach ;) )
cheers, bob
On -Feb2-2010, at -Feb2-20109:47 AM, Roger Hui wrote:
>> Take a J primitive which is relatively simple but maybe hard for a
>> beginner to intuit, like monadic "=" (self-classify). Not something
>> with bells and whistles like ";:". Personally I'd like to see an
>> animation of self-classify, because coming from APL I'm still not
>> altogether comfy with it in my own mind.
>
> Use + (plus). It'd be so "obvious" that the viewer/reader
> would think "How else would you have it?"
>
> 2 + 3
> 5
>
> 2 + 3 4 5
> 5 6 7
> 20 30 10 + 7
> 27 37 17
>
> 20 30 10 + 3 4 5
> 23 34 15
> 20 30 + 3 4 5
> |length error
> | 20 30 +3 4 5
>
> i. 3 4
> 0 1 2 3
> 4 5 6 7
> 8 9 10 11
>
> 2 + i.3 4
> 2 3 4 5
> 6 7 8 9
> 10 11 12 13
> 20 40 60 + i.3 4
> 20 21 22 23
> 44 45 46 47
> 68 69 70 71
> (i.3 4) + 100 200 19
> 100 101 102 103
> 204 205 206 207
> 27 28 29 30
> 20 40 60 80 + i.3 4
> |length error
> | 20 40 60 80 +i.3 4
>
> (i.3 4) + (10 + i.3 4)
> 10 12 14 16
> 18 20 22 24
> 26 28 30 32
>
> p.s. I believe that the current monadic = is not one of
> the better verbs in J. The representation is wasteful, being
> approximately O(n^2), and if the representation is wasteful
> then the implementation is necessarily wasteful.
> For self-classification i.~ is much better. Moreover, the "key" adverb
> (not available at the time the monad = was first defined)
> has made a self-classification verb much less needed.
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Ian Clark <earthspotty at googlemail.com>
> Date: Tuesday, February 2, 2010 8:59
> Subject: Re: [Jprogramming] The Ambiguous Dictionary
> To: Programming forum <programming at jsoftware.com>
>
>> URL embedding is something I must leave to others. I'd be starting
>> from cold as regards Moinmoin. Maybe we should simply fall back on
>> html? Remind me why we need anything fancier.
>>
>> Voice-over I have strong feelings against. Distracting, ineffective
>> and culturally dependent. Traditional and reassuring maybe, but only
>> in your own mother tongue, accent and mannerisms. Nothing going for
>> it.
>>
>> And I say that as an ex-lecturer (and courseware developer).
>>
>> Use soothing music. It's only wallpaper. And then only in a YouTube
>> showcase, not in a serious expository text.
>>
>> The same goes for moving text, or "titles" as I think movie makers
>> call them. Only good for identifying the footage, like a
>> clapper-board. The effort to read it can distract the viewer
>> from the
>> object you want him/her to attend to. There will always be
>> accompanying text. I think the purpose of animation in technical
>> exposition is to convey spatial concepts non-verbally. Therefore
>> verbiage is nothing but a distraction.
>>
>> I like your use of coloured dots. It conveys succintly that the
>> content of a given cell doesn't matter: just the interplay between
>> cells. If you use numbers, or even letters, the viewer wastes
>> brain-cycles processing these before grasping they are of no
>> importance. If you need more modal dimensions: shape and size. As
>> regards shape, chicks and tadpoles may be slightly better than squares
>> and circles, but one must balance being boring against being
>> distracting. I'd err on the "boring" side to start with, and
>> spice-up
>> judiciously. People assume animations have got to be Loony
>> Toons. But
>> someone prepared to consider programming in any language, let
>> alone J,
>> needs an attention-span longer than a 5 year old TV watcher.
>>
>> The viewer may have to study the animation for quite some time to
>> absorb its principle. Eye candy soon gets irritating. See the
>> "grasshopper escapement" animation, halfway down in
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Harrison -and work out how it
>> manages to be friction-free. Jiminy Cricket would soon begin to grate.
>>
>> Further to that example, I think continuous animation loops are good.
>> (Though it's nice to be able to stop 'em!)
>>
>> Take a J primitive which is relatively simple but maybe hard for a
>> beginner to intuit, like monadic "=" (self-classify). Not something
>> with bells and whistles like ";:". Personally I'd like to see an
>> animation of self-classify, because coming from APL I'm still not
>> altogether comfy with it in my own mind.
>>
>> And remember the better it conveys its message, the more trivial and
>> "obvious" it looks and the less time the viewer spends looking
>> at it.
>> It's why writers of public notices are always too pompous and prolix:
>> they don't want to appear dumb. It's really quite unrewarding
>> work, in
>> a way.
>>
>> Ian
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Feb 2, 2010 at 5:56 AM, bob therriault
>> <bobtherriault at mac.com> wrote:
>>> Thanks for the review, Ian
>>>
>>> It definitely needs to be sped up and, although music could be
>> added, it was going to be finished with a voice over and sound
>> effects. I hadn't got around to final version, but when I read
>> Oleg's comment about animation, I exported the 'work in
>> progress' to YouTube. YouTube does provide a string for
>> embedding, but I didn't think it would work within an email.
>>>
>>> I would be happy to work on animations as they were needed for
>> specific primitives. My experience says that there is a certain
>> level of fundamental understanding that is required before
>> animations are really effective, before that they tend towards
>> eye-candy (or worse misleading). If you have a primitive in mind
>> let me know and we can go through some iterations to see how
>> productive we are.
>>>
>>> Cheers, bob
>>>
>>> ps. you can put videos into J labs as well, by using the
>> jbrowser file and calling specific URL's hiding it within the
>> PREPARE section.
>>> eg.
>>> PREPARE
>>> launch_jbrowser_ 'http://www.apple.com/ca/ipodtouch/what-
>> is/pocket-computer.html'
>>> PREPARE
>>> It has been a while since I have done this and the result is
>> that a whole browser window will open, but when refined this may
>> have some possibilities. I'm not as sure how this will work with
>> the new browser interface. bt
>>>
>>> On -Feb1-2010, at -Feb1-20106:43 PM, Ian Clark wrote:
>>>
>>>> I like it, Bob.
>>>>
>>>> The minimalism may arise from it being a first effort, but it shows
>>>> it's neither necessary nor wise to over-egg the pudding.
>>>>
>>>> Minor crits: could do with being sped up. Needs music.
>> YouTube has a
>>>> library of free soundtracks: you can just attach one for now.
>>>>
>>>> YouTube movies can be easily embedded in your own html file.
>> Stefano &
>>>> I have done it. They generate you an <object> to
>> copy/paste. See
>>>> source of http://www.maxclark.me.uk/undeadtree/interspex.htm
>> for an
>>>> example.
>>>>
>>>> But how to do it with MoinMoin?
>>>>
>>>> So... are you offering to do a 15 second movie for each J
>> primitive?>>
>>>> Ian
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Feb 1, 2010 at 10:08 PM, bob therriault
>> <bobtherriault at mac.com> wrote:
>>>>> Hi Oleg and Ian,
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ODxv498p4ME
>>>>>
>>>>> This isn't about a specific function, but is an animation i
>> put together to explain why it is useful to organize information
>> into arrays. I developed it on keynote, but haven't yet put a
>> soundtrack to it. It's not really high end, but it wasn't too
>> hard to put together either. Let me know if you have more
>> specific ideas for animations.
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheers, bob
>>>>>
>>>>> On -Feb1-2010, at -Feb1-201012:50 PM, Oleg Kobchenko wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>> From: Ian Clark <earthspotty at googlemail.com>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> One winning instructional strategy, including Gilman and Rose,
>>>>>>>> is telling a story for each piece of material. Such stories,
>>>>>>>> among other things, may revolve around exo-paradigms.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> When I used to program in FORTH (sign of a mis-spent
>> youth) one
>>>>>>> well-beloved primer in the FORTH community was illustrated with
>>>>>>> engaging but instructive cartoons. Thus the standard word
>> SWOP was a
>>>>>>> little two-headed dragon that did what you'd guess with
>> objects on the
>>>>>>> stack. Can anyone remember the book and remind me of its title?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Starting FORTH, by Leo Brodie
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://www.forth.com/starting-forth/sf2/sf2.html
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This is fun stuff all right. And a good read for a vacation.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> What I was thinking for APL/J for a long time was
>>>>>> an interactive or animated illustrator of the operations,
>>>>>> especially those that manipulate multidimensional and
>>>>>> nested structures.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I know someone (http://www.leelamaria.com/) who could do
>> us a wodge of
>>>>>>> cartoons like that. Shall I try to get them interested?
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
More information about the Programming
mailing list