"Hello to all, and sorry being late.

I am not sure I understand all the implications that are really meant

by the below comment.

In terms of number of records, this what I have done recently, for a

one off task :

I read entirely in a WS a nearly 1.9 GB sized simple file with a few

millions records, process it and return to disk another resulting file.

It took 1 week to deliver, instead of a 3 months effort "requested" for

a conventional solution.

This is what affordable current technology allows ... WITH APL ....

Ok perhaps (?) this may not be generalized ... But, I am not so sure !

Gilbert "

Amazing, In a single week of the Gregorian calendar, (to me that is

35/40 hours) this was achieved:

1. A full techical specification of that the application was written

and then reviewed by a peer for both consistency and completeness and

detailing the technical limits of the application.

2. A full user manual, including an on-line help facility, was written

and they passed all user acceptance ciiteria.

3. A full suite of unit tests together with their corresponding

expected results were written and carried out.

4. Representatives of the user base specified and carried out their

suite of tests, using real data, both for the usability of the

application and its results.

5 A full release note that details system requirements and core

functionality for the application was produced.

6. The training material for a course, for training all other users

including future ones, as well as the arrangements for the course

itself are in place.

7. An automated installation for the application was written, tested

and used for deployment.

8. The full suite of code, documentation and test scripts and results

were archived in some version control software like Visual Source Safe.

9. The actual and book value of the application itself and the cost of

its deployment were perfectly obvious to the auditors.

10. And the application has full error recovery so that users are not

made to feel stupid.

Fascinating! I wonder why every one does not use APL for everything?

Or was this a case of:

"I know what this application SHOULD do and HOW it should be used and

HERE it is: for all other details, READ MY MIND, I am going to be

around to ANSWER all other questions and make you FEEL STUPID: accept

this or I might think you are thick!"

The answers to all other possible questions are perfectly obvious,

like:

What happens if the file is twice as big?

Will it work with the next version of the APL interpreter?

Will it work on a network?

Will it work with VISTA?

etc.

Randy M says "APL: If you can say it, it is done...."

The key part is "if you can say it" and it is understood that "I am

listening" before "it is done".

I wonder why no one believes the popular APL approach: "Here's the

solution, what is the problem?"

@f1g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:

When you can express something you need in APL, and if it feels like the

expression mirrors how you would think of it, just press Enter, and you

have an answer you can use, perhaps all the answer you need.

APL is always listening. Sometimes it listens too well.

Perhaps one too many books have been written with that approach.

--

------------------------------------------------------------------------

|\/| Randy A MacDonald | APL: If you can say it, it's done.. (ram)

|/\| XXXX@XXXXX.COM |

|\ | | The only real problem with APL is that

BSc(Math) UNBF'83 | it is "still ahead of its time."

Sapere Aude | - Morten Kromberg

Natural Born APL'er | Demo website: http://www.yqcomputer.com/

-----------------------------------------------------(INTP)----{ gnat }-

Hi Gilbert,

I too did did not undertand AA2e72E's comment "try that in APL" with

respect to Excel's 2007 new limit of one million rows ( I can just see

Austin Powers -- one MILLION rows!).

Don't listen to AA2e72E. I was sorry I bough his book for one reason.

Now I'm sorry I bought his book for two reasons.

The remark "try that in APL" was in relation to the Excel formula for

calculating Easter Sunday (refer back to the post): it was meant as a

rebuttal of the argument that things are always simpler and better in

APL. If there is a more concise formula for Easter Sunday in APL, I'd

like to see it. Useful for working out working days (in the UK, Monday

following Easter Sunday (as the Friday preceding it) is always a bank

holiday, this is always variable, unlike all the other holidays).

Just in case it is misunderstood, I'll re-iterate that the Excel

formula is NOT mine: it comes from a book by John Walkenbach.

PS: The magnitude of Excel worksheets or the depth of APL arrays are

intrinsically meaningless: there is always another that goes beyond.

The context was the allegation that Excel cannot cope with more than

32000 rows regardless of machine resources( even Excel2000 supports

65536 rows)---whereas APL may well do: an array of shape 32768 by 256

([]dr 645), the size of a worksheet, requires a workspace of 76M or

more just to create it and in that workspace no other operation like

transpose or rotate are possible.

Would that be this post, pasted below in its entirety? Now I have 3

reasons I'm sorry I bought your book.

SQL is indeed not a language, it is a means of describing the view of

the existing data that is sought/required (which may include basic

calculations), no knowledge of programming whatsoever is required: the

phrase data to information/intelligence comes to mind. SQL works in the

ultimate spirit of the APL language, namely the ability to resolve your

problem without any awareness of machine constraints or the internal

workings of any algorithms used.

Excel is "fine for your home budget": if you seriously believe that

then there is nothing more to say!!!

"it's limit appeared to be 32000+ (2^16) ..." and what do you conclude

from this? That APL does not have limits? Everything on a desktop is

ultimately bound by the resources of the computer it is running on.

Excel 2000 (since 6 years ago) can accommodate 65,536 rows on a single

worksheet and it can have as many worksheets as available resources

allow. Excel 2007 has 1M rows. Try that with APL!

It is difficult to refer back to the precise message in words: it would

be message 27 sorted in reply order on Google Groups; here's the

relevant bit:

"

As you are peddling algorithms to make a feeble point, here are a

couple for you:

=DOLLAR(("4/"&A1)/7+MOD(19*MOD(A1,19)-7,30)*14%,)*7-6

This formula (not mine!), in a cell (formatted as a date) will

calculate Easter Sunday for the year specified in cell A1 as CCYY; try

it in APL!

I hasten to add, it does not make Excel better or APL worse.

"

Obviously your cross-reference is more accurate than mine "try that in

APL" as opposed to "try it in APL". Still I'd like to know how much

memory it takes to create an APL nested array of shape 32768 256 (for

that is what Excel worksheets are, in effect) and then to do any

operation on it, like selecting all rows where the first column is

numeric; I know it takes milliseconds in MS SQL.

I did not understand the reference to Austin Powers but I believe I get

the drift; so I'll ask: did you not find anything Austin Powers in the

'Here's a loan amortisation algorithm in K (followed by the rejoinder

using the adjective lovely)' and asking for corresponding code in

something else?

I'd stop counting the reasons and put it down to bad experience.

Sometimes, this happens in life. Better still write one that keeps the

number of reasons to precisely zero, universally.

be message 27 sorted in reply order on Google Groups; here's the

relevant bit:

"

As you are peddling algorithms to make a feeble point, here are a

couple for you:

=DOLLAR(("4/"&A1)/7+MOD(19*MOD(A1,19)-7,30)*14%,)*7-6

This formula (not mine!), in a cell (formatted as a date) will

calculate Easter Sunday for the year specified in cell A1 as CCYY; try

it in APL!

I hasten to add, it does not make Excel better or APL worse.

"

Obviously your cross-reference is more accurate than mine "try that in

APL" as opposed to "try it in APL". Still I'd like to know how much

memory it takes to create an APL nested array of shape 32768 256 (for

that is what Excel worksheets are, in effect) and then to do any

operation on it, like selecting all rows where the first column is

numeric; I know it takes milliseconds in MS SQL.

I did not understand the reference to Austin Powers but I believe I get

the drift; so I'll ask: did you not find anything Austin Powers in the

'Here's a loan amortisation algorithm in K (followed by the rejoinder

using the adjective lovely)' and asking for corresponding code in

something else?

I'd stop counting the reasons and put it down to bad experience.

Sometimes, this happens in life. Better still write one that keeps the

number of reasons to precisely zero, universally.

Sorry Paul, that I'm listening with you both, but ...

thanks for unveiling this!

I'm ultimately surprised that "AA2e72E" is writing books, although ...

he's typing a lot. I could expect it "I don't know K (and I am not going

to)"

How do they call this attitude?

"AA2e72E" can't even read or is not reading - nobody was talking about

calculating Easten Sunday with APL. I said - twice - "the munks

did that for me" (you might remember Ray Cannon's article in Vector).

Instead, the subject was the "leapyear". "AA2e72E" came up with a

buggy JavaScript piece of code, which should be readable, bla, bla ...

(somebody from J Software checked, I didn't - I had no urge whatsoever).

We've seen this kind of APL-bashers for ages, most of them unable

to distinguish {dot} from {iota}, if you know what I mean.

Best regards and say hello to your brother (I still have his

butterfly-tie!).

(jk) Jan Karman

thanks for unveiling this!

I'm ultimately surprised that "AA2e72E" is writing books, although ...

he's typing a lot. I could expect it "I don't know K (and I am not going

to)"

How do they call this attitude?

"AA2e72E" can't even read or is not reading - nobody was talking about

calculating Easten Sunday with APL. I said - twice - "the munks

did that for me" (you might remember Ray Cannon's article in Vector).

Instead, the subject was the "leapyear". "AA2e72E" came up with a

buggy JavaScript piece of code, which should be readable, bla, bla ...

(somebody from J Software checked, I didn't - I had no urge whatsoever).

We've seen this kind of APL-bashers for ages, most of them unable

to distinguish {dot} from {iota}, if you know what I mean.

Best regards and say hello to your brother (I still have his

butterfly-tie!).

(jk) Jan Karman

@j72g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:

This doesn't look like something that would make APL break a sweat. I'm

curious as to the meaning of:

. DOLLAR(X),

"4/"&A1 -- I _do_ know A1 is a reference to cell A1, but the quoted

thing..?

14% means what?

I've some guesses, and I'll work from there, using J, which is close

enough:

_6 + 7* DOLLAR (4 }. ": A1) % 7+ 40* 30 | _7 + 19 * 19 + A1

I'm not sure what the answer is supposed to look like... MMDD perhaps?

Some hints would be appreciated.

--

------------------------------------------------------------------------

|\/| Randy A MacDonald | APL: If you can say it, it's done.. (ram)

|/\| XXXX@XXXXX.COM |

|\ | | The only real problem with APL is that

BSc(Math) UNBF'83 | it is "still ahead of its time."

Sapere Aude | - Morten Kromberg

Natural Born APL'er | Demo website: http://www.yqcomputer.com/

-----------------------------------------------------(INTP)----{ gnat }-

Given:

1. ActiveWorkbook.Date1904 = True (overwridden)

2. Application.ReferenceStyle = xlA1 (default)

3. Columns("C:C").NumberFormat = "DD/MM/YYYY" (overridden)

4. ActiveWindow.DisplayFormulas = True (default)

The data view of a worksheet (Year is in Col A, Result is n Col B,

Result as Date is in Col C)

Year Result Result as Date

1960 20560 16/04/1960

2002 35883 30/03/2002

2006 37360 15/04/2006

2010 38809 03/04/2010

Given:

5. ActiveWindow.DisplayFormulas = True (overridden)

The formula view of the worksheet

Year Result Result as Date

1960 =DOLLAR(("4/"&A2)/7+MOD(19*MOD(A2,19)-7,30)*14%,)*7-6 =B2

2002 =DOLLAR(("4/"&A3)/7+MOD(19*MOD(A3,19)-7,30)*14%,)*7-6 =B3

2006 =DOLLAR(("4/"&A4)/7+MOD(19*MOD(A4,19)-7,30)*14%,)*7-6 =B4

2010 =DOLLAR(("4/"&A5)/7+MOD(19*MOD(A5,19)-7,30)*14%,)*7-6 =B5

The worksheet functions like DOLLAR, MOD, % are documented in the help

files:refer to both the Excel and the Excel VBA files.

Notes:

1. The formula works equally well when ActiveWorkbook.Date1904 = False

but you wil see different integers in column B but the result in column

C will be identical.

2. The numbers in column B represent the number of days since a

reference date (with 1904 as the reference date (day 1) is 02/01/1904

otherwise is 01/01/1900) on which Easter Sunday falls.

3. The dates are in Short UK Regional Date format.

If you want to apply another format to the date, this will give you a

clue:

I linked cells B2:B4 into D2:D4 and applied this format:

Columns("D:D").NumberFormat = "ddd dd, mmm yyyy"

The result is:

Year Result Result as Date Long Date

1960 22023 17/04/1960 Sun 17, Apr 1960

2002 37346 31/03/2002 Sun 31, Mar 2002

2006 38823 16/04/2006 Sun 16, Apr 2006

2010 40272 04/04/2010 Sun 04, Apr 2010

Hope this is of some value.

Well spotted: the base date must be 1900 else the result in B2 needs 1

added to it.

added to it.

@j72g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:

Given I won't be buying Excel any time soon, I'll presume the help files

will not be available. The samples should be a great help. Thanks.

--

------------------------------------------------------------------------

|\/| Randy A MacDonald | APL: If you can say it, it's done.. (ram)

|/\| XXXX@XXXXX.COM |

|\ | | The only real problem with APL is that

BSc(Math) UNBF'83 | it is "still ahead of its time."

Sapere Aude | - Morten Kromberg

Natural Born APL'er | Demo website: http://www.yqcomputer.com/

-----------------------------------------------------(INTP)----{ gnat }-

1. APL future; was APL conference info

2. APL-ASCII (longish, includes code) [ was " An APL Archive" ]

3. APL BUG 1 Apr 2010: Paul Jackson on APL from VB.Net

4. APL in 2020 at APL 2010 Berlin - Will you be there?

5. Remembering APL-11 (WAS: Any one out there have VAX APL Manuals)

6. APLSE (APL*PLUS Special Edition) Freeware DOS APL

7. CDI APL terminals [WAS: Graphics capabilities of APL interpreters]

8. opening an access apl. from access apl.

9. APL BUG 11 May 2009: Catherine Lathwell Rediscovers the History of APL

10. APL is Alive +ACY- Well V/S APL Needs to learn

11. If APL Is So Wonderful, How Come APL Programmers Aren't Rich

12. APL Consultants Group - A New Force for APL

13. APL Graphics with APL*PLUS PC version 11

14. APL is Alive & Well V/S APL Needs to learn

15. Autumn meeting of APL Germany and GSE Working Group APL

11 post • Page:**1** of **1**