On Mar 8, 1:33=A0am, phil chastney
<phil.hates.s...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> Gosi wrote:
> > On Mar 7, 8:58 pm, phil chastney
> > <phil.hates.s...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> >> Gosi wrote:
> >>> On Mar 6, 2:53 pm, phil chastney
> >>> <phil.hates.s...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> >>>>> 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,
perhap=
s?
> >>> It was you who suggested that technical symbols could be used in
> >>> Unicode.
> >>>> companies with operations entirely within the English-speaking
world =
may
> >>>> also find Unicode useful when they need to use a mathematical or
> >>>> technical symbol or two, or even a quotation in Foreign (it adds so
m=
uch
> >>>> _style_, don't you think?)
> >>> That is why I asked if those symbols could be used to translate to
Apl=
> >>> functionality
> >> I'm still baffled
>
> >> Unicode is an encoding, it maps abstract characters and symbols to
> >> hexadecimal values, nothing more (actually, there is a lot of
ancillary=
> >> stuff as well, but we'll ignore that, pro tem)
>
> >> most known characters and quite a lot of technical symbols can be
mappe=
d
> >> to hexadecimal values using Unicode
>
> >> the technical symbols include every published APL symbol ever used in
> >> any way
>
> >> it also includes just about every mathematical symbol the American
> >> Mathematical Society could think of
>
> >> so a stream of mathematical symbols could be encoded using Unicode
> >> values, and (if one exists) a semantically equivalent stream of APL
> >> symbols could also be encoded using Unicode values
>
> >> I'm sure you knew that
>
> >> Unicode has no functional power, and in particular, it doesn't have
> >> markup, so I should amend that earlier statement to "a _linear_
stream
> >> of mathematical symbols..."
>
> >> a stream of mathematical symbols, with embedded markup (presumably
> >> ASCII-only), could also be encoded using Unicode values
>
> >> conversion to a semantically equivalent stream of APL symbols could
be
> >> done by hand, or using a programming language[1], but I doubt very
much=
> >> if a general solution exists
>
> >> so, yes, some 2-D mathematical expressions could be translated into
> >> executable APL using only Unicode values, which is my present best
gues=
s
> >> at what you were asking
>
> >> and if I've misunderstood you, my apologies
>
> >> all the best =A0 . . . =A0 /phil
>
> >> [1] note that there is no requirement for the programming language to
> >> know anything about Unicode =A0-- =A0Unicode 1.0 has a copyright date
(=
c)
> >> 1990, 1991 and at that time (before the introduction of w_char) some
> >> people were already using unsigned ints to store Unicode values
>
> > For example:
>
> > \sum_{k=3D1}^{n}{a_k} means a1 + a2 + ... + an.
>
> > Unicode sign 2211 and below it k=3D1 and above it n
>
> it's important to keep your levels of detail clear here
>
> "below it" and "above it" are layout specifications, and for that you
> need markup, which is not part of an encoding scheme
>
> there is another layout convention, which places "k=3D1" level with the
> lower horizontal of the Sigma, and the "n" level with the upper
horizontal=
>
> one convention is (normally) used for displayed formulae, the other for
> inline for formulae (i.e, embedded in plaintext)
>
> as Sam Sirlin has pointed out, there are various markup schemes
>
> your chosen markup language may or may not support both conventions, but
> your hypothetical translator surely must...?!
>
> does that help? =A0 . . . =A0 /phil
In the case of the Sigma we need to interpret three lines together
First line with the n
Second Sigma
Third k=3D1
In general the formulas would be written in a grid like fashion and
operations grouped together
Interesting to interpret formulas like
1
----------------------- =3D 1 % (y + 3) * ( x - 2) % 10
(y + 3) * ( x - 2)
---------
10
The formula written in 5 lines
|
