Anonymous user
Talk:User defined pipe and redirection operators: Difference between revisions
Talk:User defined pipe and redirection operators (view source)
Revision as of 19:27, 16 September 2011
, 12 years ago→comments after writing the J implementation
Line 211:
::Similarly, good data flow also matters... and is also readily available in the context of programming languages (as long as you do not try to make one language behave exactly like another).
::So... personally? I would not bother changing the task -- I would just file it somewhere out of the way. It's not like there's any shortage of problems that need solving. --[[User:Rdm|Rdm]] 16:56, 16 September 2011 (UTC)
::: I disagree about the pipe-like dataflow being not useful. For example, when reading or writing a PDF, a PDF stream object may go through multiple encoders/filters in sequence, e.g. PNG, then hexencoded, then RLE, then flate, and each stream itself may contain multiple streams inside (not unlike tar xf). When dealing with one of these, it's probably a good idea to use filters that pass on partial data as soon as possible so that total memory usage doesn't get blown out of proportion. It has ''nothing'' to do with OS pipes, either.
::: The beef you have is probably more of a J thing: assume we'll all have massively parallel computers in the near future; assume we'll always have enough memory; thus always deal with the full extent of available data because it's the 'right thing' and will naturally lead to better-looking, more concise code. Which is probably ok for academia, but it's not fair to blame everything else that fall outside of academic scope. --[[User:Ledrug|Ledrug]] 19:27, 16 September 2011 (UTC)
| |||