Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!mit-eddie!genrad!panda!husc6!harvard!seismo!mcvax!ukc!qtlon!wcwvax!ian
From: ian@wcwvax.UUCP (Ian Kemmish)
Newsgroups: net.lang.apl
Subject: Re: APL structure
Message-ID: <798@wcwvax.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 3-Jun-86 06:49:18 EDT
Article-I.D.: wcwvax.798
Posted: Tue Jun  3 06:49:18 1986
Date-Received: Sat, 7-Jun-86 13:50:05 EDT
Organization: Whitechapel Computer Works, London
Lines: 33

>. . ..  "if/then/else" would be very useful in APL.  You wind up
>using go to (->) instead.  This is bad for the same reason it is bad in
>other languages.  The data structuring somewhat reduces the need for such
                       ^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^^
>things, but not all that much -- particularly for complex applications.

When APL was all I knew, I used to think it had data structures, and that
nested arrays, when they eventually arrived, would be even better.

Then I started playing with Lisp and Smalltalk, and I began to get
suspicious.  I started calling what APL had "data aggregates".

Now I earn my bread & butter playing around in C, I *know* that APL
doesn't have structured data!  I don't think I could possibly go back
now.

What I want to know is, am I a lone voice crying in the wilderness,
or do other people who've moved on from APL feel the same way??


Disclaimer: I'm not out of touch: I have APL on my PC at home, but
	I only ever use it for the screen editor;  I have just helped
	port a groovy modern APL onto our MG-1 workstation product,
	and I only ever use *that* when the pop-up calculator runs out
	of steam.

			Ian Kemmish
	  ____
      \   \   \   \    /	Whitechapel Computer Works Ltd.
       \  /\   \  /\  /   	75 Whitechapel Road
        \/  \___\/  \/  	London E1 1DU

"Makers of the fastest (and slowest) workstations in Britain"