What should our scope be? - APL

TopAnswers APL

Top Answer

RikedyP

[APL](https://aplwiki.com) and APL-like languages (e.g. [J](https://aplwiki.com/wiki/J), [K](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/K_(programming_language)) and [Q](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Q_(programming_language_from_Kx_Systems))), along with  [array programming](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Array_programming) in any language (e.g. [NumPy](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NumPy), [Julia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julia_(programming_language)), and [MatLab](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MATLAB)) (especially if in comparison to APLs).

Answer #2

Adám

# APL only

In line with [APL Wiki](https://aplwiki.com/wiki/APL_Wiki:Content_guidelines#What_is_APL.3F) only APLs are addressed directly, with related topics being relegated to content about them in the context of main-line APL.

This disallows things like J, K, and NumPy.

While this might lead to less content being included, it'll probable lessen the noise ratio, as non-APL content isn't generally *useful* the the APLer, though it might be interesting.

It also makes UI choices regard syntax colouring, the custom language bar, and the default TIO language easier.

Answer #3

Jack Douglas

There are [only 227](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/tagged/apl) questions tagged `apl` on SO. There are also [368](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/tagged/j) tagged `j` and [46](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/tagged/k) tagged `k`.

That being so, it would be good to err on the side of wider scope. From what I can tell, although the syntax looks very different in each case, both [J](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J_(programming_language))[^1] and [K](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/K_(programming_language))[^2] are closely related to APL. Likewise Q and LYaPAS though those look like they may be very niche.

The real question, which I can't answer myself, is whether expertise and interest in APL is likely to denote expertise and interest of some degree in the other areas. If that is the case I hope you'll include them in scope.

[^1]: > The J programming language, developed in the early 1990s by Kenneth E. Iverson and Roger Hui, is an array programming language ***based primarily on APL*** (also by Iverson). 

[^2]: > K is a proprietary array processing programming language developed by Arthur Whitney and commercialized by Kx Systems. The language serves as the foundation for kdb+, an in-memory, column-based database, and other related financial products. The language, originally developed in 1993, ***is a variant of APL*** and contains elements of Scheme. Advocates of the language emphasize its speed, facility in handling arrays, and expressive syntax.

Answer #4

Adám

# Dyalog only

The benefit of this is that there'll be no confusion as to what code works where, and it'll be very easy to make design choices for the site, language bar, and TIO language.

The downside is that there'll be less content.

A possibility is to include close Dyalog "clones", like ngn/apl and dzaima/APL.

@RikedyP, re: [your answer](#a1716), I've added the banner (it needs a restyle but the text is there). I also flagged your answer as it doesn't really belong on this question — if you post it as a new 'Meta' post (like this post), it will be useful for posterity.

@@@ wikipedia 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 TMN "Array programming" "In computer science, array programming refers to solutions which allow the application of operations to an entire set of values at once. Such solutions are commonly used in scientific and engineering settings."

Until now, they've mostly differed in repertoire of built-ins, and for some, the swapped meaning of two half-built-ins. However, lately, some dialects have extended built-ins in various mutually incompatible ways, with the core meaning being the same.

@Jack Indeed the current state of [the APL Orchard chat room on SE](https://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/52405/the-apl-orchard) is that everything APL-related is on-topic. However, for a Q&A site, I'm not sure how much sense it makes. Actually, he *syntax* of J and K is more or less identical to that of APL, whereas they are all different from each other in *spelling* of most things, in the tooling, and in the array model. The problem is that not much advice is generally applicable to more than one at a time.

4 Answers