[Jprogramming] @: and capped fork

[Alex Giannakopoulos]

Thanks Marshall and Raul, and yes, of course the question assumed that
there /was/ a need for an object.

My guess is you'd get that asked a lot if people were arriving at J from OO
languages, I'd hate to be the one making the case that you don't always
need objects, even when I agree with that statement.

On 3 December 2012 19:21, Raul Miller <rauldmiller at gmail.com> wrote:

> There are several ways of translating that javascript code into J, I
> would have to know something about the larger context to know which of
> them I would pick.
>
> That said, one of the simplest would be:
>
> do_something 'bee'
> do_something 'see'
>
> Another variation would be:
>
> b_a_=: 'bee'
> s_a_=: 'see'
> do_something at do_a_&> nl_a_ 0
>
> But obviously one of my questions would be: why do we even have an
> object here, and does a different arrangement make sense?
>
> --
> Raul
>
> On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 1:09 PM, Alex Giannakopoulos
> <aegean at blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
> > On 3 December 2012 15:59, Raul Miller <rauldmiller at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> That said, when I want to translate J into a language other people
> >> understand, Javascript is usually my first choice.
> >>
> >
> > Why does that not surprise me?  :-)
> >
> >
> > Incidentally, and if you have nothing better to do, how would you code
> this
> > Javascript into J?
> >  a = new Object();
> >  a.b = "bee";
> >  a.c = "see";
> >  for (var prop in a)
> >       do_something(a[prop]) ;
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
>