
GNU APL 1.7 Released - Avshalom
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-apl/2017-03/msg00037.html
======
josteink
> All bugs reported before Mar. 17, 2017 were fixed.

Irrespective of how many bugs that are and how severe they are, I love the
mentality embedded in such a statement.

Seeing bugs live in bug trackers for _years_ is depressing.

~~~
ClashTheBunny
Except for if the fix is 'wont-fix'.

~~~
xwvvvvwx
wont-fix is better than ignored for years.

------
Athas
GNU APL is unusually polished considering how obscure it is. When I was first
looking for a free APL implementation some years ago, it took me quite a while
to find it via search engines. It also doesn't seem like it's very visible in
the APL community itself.

In fact, my only criticism is that it is a bit awkward to write simple Unix-
style programs. The APL interpreter quite resisted being used in batch mode,
and needed special flags to avoid launching background daemons or being chatty
on the standard output streams. That was a few years ago, though - I wonder if
it's been fixed.

Edit: looks like the search engines are much more favourable to GNU APL
nowadays.

~~~
lokedhs
I agree with the difficulty in writing standalone programs. However, this is
not the main use case for APL. You should think of it more as an alternative
to something like R, which also isn't normally used to develop arbitrary
standalone programs.

I use GNU APL as a smarter calculator, allowing to me manipulate datasets in a
very flexible way. The programs I write a small utilities that I user
interactively.

That said, the FILE_IO workspace provides access to low-level OS access. It
can be a bit cumbersome to use, but it's good for building higher-level
abstractions. As an example, last year I made an APL submission to Google Code
Jam and while the solution to the problem was a single line of code, reading
the data file and writing the output was significantly more.

------
tombert
APL is a language that confuses the hell out of me, and I hate that. I wish
there was more guidance online to using it, since I find the paradigm to be
very interesting.

~~~
agumonkey
There's a few talks and demo sessions on youtube, they help tremendously to
decypher the structure and logic behind APL.

~~~
cgrubb
I think this is a good youtube video for someone starting from zero:

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_DTpQ4Kk2wA](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_DTpQ4Kk2wA)

An issue is how to enter the symbols. The way I do it is I created some input
methods for Mac and Windows which use at-signs followed by the APL community
name for the symbol:

    
    
        @times       ×
        @grade       ⍋ 
        @reverse     ⌽
        @domino      ⌹
    

[https://github.com/clarkgrubb/latex-
input/tree/master/apl](https://github.com/clarkgrubb/latex-
input/tree/master/apl)

~~~
brudgers
I've a theory that APL might become increasingly attractive as touchscreen
computing matures (part of the theory is that touchscreen computing is not
mature).

Support for just about every programming language (e.g.
[https://www.gnu.org/software/apl/Community.html#EMACSMODE](https://www.gnu.org/software/apl/Community.html#EMACSMODE))
is one reason why I found learning Emacs to be worth the effort.

~~~
coldtea
> _I 've a theory that APL might become increasingly attractive as touchscreen
> computing matures_

At best it might become increasingly MARGINALLY more attractive.

~~~
brudgers
I don't see your point.

~~~
coldtea
That while a new keyboard technology like touch surfaces that allows people to
have the APL glyphs at their disposal will help increase adoption a little,
APL will always remain a niche language.

It's not the "being able to type in the glyphs" that hurts it, as much as the
reading them -- and the understanding of its concepts.

~~~
brudgers
I did not say what you are arguing over.

~~~
coldtea
"I've a theory that APL might become increasingly attractive as touchscreen
computing matures (part of the theory is that touchscreen computing is not
mature)."

~~~
brudgers
Ah, everything.

------
erkose
Never tried it, but I love the concept. Saw some video, and it's amazing for
what it is.

------
throwaway7645
Sweet! How many people are contributing?

~~~
lokedhs
A handful of people only. Jürgen Sauermann is the main developer. Others, such
as myself have provided contributions. I'm behind the Emacs integration as
well as the SQL support.

The mailing list[1] is a great place to follow the development. If you have
general APL questions, the members are usually happy to answer those too.

[1] [https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-
apl](https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-apl)

~~~
throwaway7645
Thanks for the SQL support. That is always nice!

------
bike4beer
My first language back in 1970, then if you wanted to 'program' you had a
choice, punch cards and use ASM or Cobol/Fortran, or use a selectric
typewriter and do APL.

APL is a natural language for those who love math, however without the correct
keyboard with APL fonts labeled on the keyboard I would think it to all be
tedious. In 1986 there were some companys selling APL for IBM-PC's, and the SW
included some stickers you could apply to your keyboard so you could know
where to type the APL characters.

Most of the APL variants I saw on UNIX 1980-2000, used a terrible encoding
system for using the APL font.

APL in many ways is like PYTHON of today, fast and powerful, back in the day
even Tektronix offered a graphics terminal ( 1970 ) that let you code APL and
generate graphics instantly not unlike what you can do today. The nice thing
about APL is that all types and maxtrix/scalar/vector op's are taken care for
you, you never had to worry about types.

In many way's APL with the proper keyboard is much better that what we have
had ever since.

Around the Wheel we go as they used to say. Not unlike a hamster in a cage.

~~~
lokedhs
Well, you still have it. GNU APL is there, and you really don't need a
dedicated keyboard. It didn't take me long to learn the layout, and the Emacs
mode provides a shortcut that pops up a picture of it to help you learn.

Also, all modern APL implementations use Unicode, which contains all the APL
characters so there is no need to mess with special fonts something like that.

