Re: Debugging
- From: microapl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Tue, 27 May 2008 06:49:44 -0700 (PDT)
On 27 May, 13:58, phil chastney
<phil.hates.s...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
definitely -- cut&paste between documentation, scripts and immediate
execution should be a doddle ...provided they come from the same vendor
cut&paste from vendor A's documentation to vendor B's interpreter will
work only if vendors A and B use the same mapping from APL symbols to
Unicode values (that is a necessary but not a sufficient condition)
Phil, this simply isn't true, at least in the case of pasting into
APLX, and (I believe) the other major APL vendors.
At the risk of repeating myself, it is possible and sensible to have
multiple Unicode values mapping to a single APL symbol. This is what
APLX does, and I believe others do as well. So, yes, you CAN paste
from (say) IBM APL2 or Dyalog APL sessions directly into APLX, and I
believe the other way round.
Where there is a problem, it is most likely to be caused by
documentation which still uses non-Unicode encodings. Sadly, this
currently includes our PDF manuals, not because we are stupid, but
because many PDF readers out there do not fully support Unicode.
The problem won't occur for Unicode-encoded web pages, provided any
reasonable set of choices of character encodings has been made.
If anyone is interested in the details, see the very last page of the
APLX Language Manual, (http://www.microapl.co.uk/apl/APLXLangRef.pdf)
"Alternative Unicode Mappings".
The bottom line is: embrace Unicode, it's a great thing for APL!
Richard Nabavi
MicroAPL
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Debugging
- From: phil chastney
- Re: Debugging
- References:
- Debugging
- From: Gosi
- Re: Debugging
- From: jk
- Re: Debugging
- From: Gosi
- Re: Debugging
- From: Gosi
- Re: Debugging
- From: phil chastney
- Debugging
- Prev by Date: Re: Vector Volume 23 N°3 -corrected link
- Next by Date: Re: Debugging
- Previous by thread: Re: Debugging
- Next by thread: Re: Debugging
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|