rabarbers

Thanks for explaining! But how about this example:

  x:42
  {x+1}[5]

  6

I tested and seems, that x is the first implicit parameter, y - second, z - third. It is as stated in their online documentation. When you try following example:

  {y+x*z}[1;2;3]

5

And in Q you cannot define implicit parameters with names, for example,: a, b, c. But You can define parameters explicitly:

  {[a;b;c]a+b*c}[1;2;3]

In KatLang there are no predefined implicit parameter names. The user is the one who defines implicit parameters by declaring the implicit parameter names.

A1 in Javascript pseudocode would be:

  function A1(x, y) {return x*y + x; }

  function A2(y, x) {return y*x + y; }

  A1 = y~ * x + y

  A1 = y * ~x + y

  A1 = y * x + y~

Can you explain the difference little bit more, Maybe using Javascript pseudocode as comparable example? I want to understand how Q is different from KatLang. The problem with me is that I do not know where I can try Q code, therefore I rely only on the documentation fragments I can find.

Link to documentation is broken: https://codigo.so/docs/ (also link to community is broken, but I care more about Documentation link).

More specifically: the first unknown identifier becomes the first parameter for the closest algorithm defined with {} brackets. Properties (also called named algorithms) are defined as {} context. And KatLang program also is defined as {} context. I call it Second order algorithm - algorithms can contain another algorithms. First order algorithm is something defined between commas or semicolons. But inside brackets () or {} you can define second order algorithm.

According to Q documentation, Q supports only 3 implicit parameters x, y, z: https://web.archive.org/web/20190213035913/http://code.kx.co...

Yes, the first unknown identifier becomes the first parameter, next unknown identifier becomes next parameter and so on...

Probably picking the term "perfect" was not the best think I could do. Seems, that others actively fight against it. I still believe that the perfect syntax has both attributes: 1) it is the shortest 2) it is expressive - you can express any expression in it. Picking that name made my life much more difficult.

You need to carefully pick the right brackets () or {}. You can define an algorithm with both of the brackets, the difference is that () does not capture the parameter, but {} captures the parameter which is used inside the brackets. When You define a property, then property body is automatically interpreted as defined in {} brackets.

I will do some research on APL and your mentioned 'commute operator', cannot comment on it now. But regarding languages: k/q the issues with them is that they use x, y and z as keywords for the parameters. x is always the first parameter, y - second, z - third. In KatLang parameter names are not predefined keywords, you can pick almost any parameter names you like.

I am mainly inspired by C#. Ok, I can agree, that some things depends on the interpretation. You can think about several returned values as a tuple. In designing Algorithm concept, I was thinking how to decompose or deconstruct a mathematical function - to be able to operate with parameters, to transform input into output. Here You will say that it is the definition of function. Well, I went little bit further. In KatLang it is very important if you use brackets () or {}. Both brackets defines an algorithm, but () cannot hold implicit parameter. Maybe thinking from this perspective will help you see some more value in KatLang. What I wanted to say is that in KatLang I 'destroyed' or 'decomposed' mathematical function and used the parts to construct a concept that in KatLang is called an algorithm.

I think, that there is needed Android app - calculator using KatLang syntax. That (or maybe iOS version) would make You care about it. I am planning to use KatLang syntax for physics tests in schools. Physics formulas can be defined using KatLang syntax. That is experimental idea, but I believe, that it can make a difference.

Your OCaml function example looks like feature I call conditional parameters in KatLang (inspired from Erlang). In mathematics exists many different concepts which are called perfect. For example, perfect numbers. God called Lucifer a perfect. I provided a definition for symbols perfectness and tokens perfectness. You can call it unprofessional, but I did my best. I do not call my work perfect to make it more significant. I use term perfect as an attribute of the code expressions. Imagine identity function:

  function(x) {return x; }

  x

Thanks for the elixir examples.

Tuples require object deconstruction syntax. KatLang does not have object deconstruction feature. KatLang has simply deconstructed the function into input and output. In KatLang you define algorithms by specifying inputs and outputs. If You use implicit parameter, then the algorithm has an input. If You do not use implicit parameters, then the algorithm has only output and it is more like a data structure rather than a function.

I agree, that parameter ignorance operator # is ugly. I do not like it. The plan is to remove it in the future versions, but it requires some research.

About expression reading and parsing... Your argument is correct, but KatLang expressions are relatively short. I do not expect that KatLang will replace general purpose programming languages. KatLang is just a simple language for calculations. Main goal was to redesign the calculator and KatLang is good for that.

Modern math syntax is relatively new, it started to form in 18th century. It is not too late to make some changes. Implicit parameters is only one feature in KatLang. Classic math functions can return only one value, that is why in KatLang there are no functions. In KatLang everything is an algorithm - concept which can return several outputs. Yes, some programming languages have syntactic sugar for that too, but still there are no accepted general syntax. Lambda is special case for an algorithm! Even natural languages have experienced a lot of changes. For example, Latvian language grammar changed in only 10 years. Maybe You are right about implicit parameters, but I believe, that implicit parameters are useful and I will try to convince the world about it. We will see how it will turn out ;).

It is not the same.

   A1 = x * y + x    
   A2 = y * x + x    
   A1(1, 2), A2(1, 2)    

   A1 = x~ * y + x   

Sorry, I do not know how to post code snippets in HN properly.

When you have A=xy+x from math perspective it looks like assigning a value to a variable. When You use A(x,y)=xy+x it looks like math function definition. You can look at it as if used variable assignment syntax and changed underlying semantics to the function definition syntax. I suppose, people are familiar with classic math syntax and it will be difficult to change their beliefs. But I also believe, that smartphone usage can change people habits. When function body defines the function signature, it is much easier to move around the function definition on small screen devices, define function, edit, and so on... I advice to watch promotional video for KatLang predecessor - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ya8beSCx1IA It is still available on Windows Phone marketplace as IlCalculus app. Next goal is to develop Android app and I believe then it will be much easier to convince you, that implicit parameter declaration is the future feature of the clalculator.

KatLang parser is executed as Blazor webassembly app on client side, therefore your entered KatLang code is not sent to the server. But I agree, it needs https, especially when KatLang supports operators like 'load' which can load KatLang code from other sources. Loading part is inspired from Prolog predicate consult.

Page does not require any authentication and I wanted to make it simple. But too many people are asking about https, so I will configure https.

I was obsessed with the perfect syntax. Declaring method parameters in method parameters list is redundant, because the parameters appear in the method body anyway. This approach is not the best in all situations, but for short expressions, like lambda expressions, it is perfect (in my opinion). Check my paper on comparing lambda expression implementation: https://www.bjmc.lu.lv/fileadmin/user_upload/lu_portal/proje...

The author here. I am ready to answer any questions about KatLang. The future plan is to create android app and I hope that it will become the future calculator. I have been postponing android app creation for years, but now KatLang is in good shape and I can continue with tool development.

I started with udacity course: https://www.udacity.com/course/cs262 it teached how to build simple javascript parser.

I do not understand why should HN be afraid to give reasonable reason for down voting. Looking at picture I also thought that Maryam Mirzakhani is man. I understood my mistake only by reading down-voted comments. Someone is spoiling valuable comments and it happens too often. Sad.

A) cultures are different and such subjective argument is not enough to use down-vote. If you are some smart ass who want something without emotions, go and chat with your PC, but if you are reading public opinions, do not be surprised that they are written by humans (probably containing some emotions). F) when someone makes something good and publishes it to be accessible by society it is normal to receive thanks, especially if it is open source project or non-commercial project aimed to make the world better. But suddenly some smart asses appears from nowhere with zero contribution, but with privilege to make other achievements invisible.

In my belief down-voting system is unfair. Especially if you are advised to shut-up when you are down-voted because it makes conversation boring... As HN does not stimulate responsible conversation, but only something like "say and shut-up if we do not like you", there are no reason for me to keep track of conversation and provide more arguments to prove that I am right.

Knuth wrote: soon USA will lose domonant positions. His prediction was wrong, which leads me to think that his oppinion about software patents was highly theoretical assuming how it would be if..., because he truly believes that... Such arguments are emotionally driven.

I suggest a book "A Short History of Nearly Everything": http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Short_History_of_Nearly_Every...

Seems there is possible misunderstanding of "software" definition. Any software written for modern processors are interpreted as some binary code... so it is one astronomical number. Probably there are even more than 9 teenagers "looking for their lucky numbers", but that is not what inventors are trying to patent :D. Look at what large corporations are working on and You will see the picture of what can be patented and what inventions will be valuable in near future. But that is grown-ups field, not teenagers, who can't imagine software startup inventing inventions that could be valuable to others ;).

I work at home. I rarely use coworking space, but if I use, I do not exchange ideas with others in public space. One more aspect: I live in Europe, but fill US patent applications (because I can't afford EU patenting process. In my oppinion EU is not friendly for inventors.), so even if there will be some information leak, still idea will not be introduced in US market.

I too did not knew what is deck and as I am not native English speaker, it sounded like Tesla VCs want too start with seeing a dick :D.