Re: Dyalog releases Version 12

phil chastney wrote:
> Gosi wrote:
>> On Mar 6, 9:11 am, phil chastney
>> <snip>
>>
>> It has been interesting to watch the glacial speed of Unicode
>> adaptation.
>> I guess we have talked about Unicode for 20 years in this group.
>> I think that APL2 is all Unicode now if I remember correctly.
>> J supports Unicode.
> 
> "glacial"? meaning "retreating rapidly in the face of climate change"?
> 
> I guess that's a fair metaphor for a general reluctance to adopt UTF-8
> 
>> It will be interesting to see if people use Unicode to translate
>> scientific mathematical notations directly to Apl.
>>
>> Has anyone tried that?
> 
> what exactly are you looking for here? some sort of 2-D input encoded 
> using Unicode, being interpreted in (or translated into?) APL, perhaps?
> 
> because if you are, it seems to me the actual encoding being used is a 
> lot less important than the 2-D nature of the input

Yes. You need something like TeX, or Omega. Or mathml? One might argue 
that for mathematics as a working language to be supported, the 
"encoding" would seem to be required to handle this 2d nature, and hence 
that unicode would have to have something like TeX embedded. Other 
languages require this as well... I think the Tibetan encoding has the 
notion of a stacking operator, but I recall it seemed rather limited to 
me, rather than a powerful general facility.

Sun has proposed the language fortress to support a bit of 2d 
mathematics language and characters.

Sam