Read Notation as a Tool of Thought for reasons why APL looks the way it looks.
It's a pretty common idea "let's rename all those ugly APL primitives with descriptive names". And it's easy to do. Why do you think the idea doesn't stick in APL, even though it works in say Matlab? Maybe it is because for APL programmers \. is perceived on the same level as + and you don't ask to rename + to 'plus'.
It's a pretty common idea "let's rename all those ugly APL primitives with descriptive names". And it's easy to do. Why do you think the idea doesn't stick in APL, even though it works in say Matlab? Maybe it is because for APL programmers \. is perceived on the same level as + and you don't ask to rename + to 'plus'.