Re: [q-lang-users] q-lang-users Digest, Vol 2, Issue 2

[Albert G. <Dr....@t-...>]

Boyko Bantchev wrote:
> At least for the Q that Larry Gregg mentioned -- the one
> at http://kx.com -- it most certainly is alive and well :)

Yes, I see that q is a descendant of k, which I noticed before. It's 
rather unfortunate that the developers chose the same name, albeit in 
lowercase.

Hmm... is this somehow related to Per Bothner's Q? That was developed 
around the beginning of the 1990s, and it was also based on APL, IIRC.

> K is highly applicative (though not purely functional),
> and mostly combinator-based (i.e. function-level).
> Blindingly fast, with unbelievably compact implementation

Yes, and it's also a very terse language. :)

-- 
Dr. Albert Gr"af
Dept. of Music-Informatics, University of Mainz, Germany
Email:  Dr....@t-..., ag...@mu...
WWW:    http://www.musikinformatik.uni-mainz.de/ag