Hacker News Reader

The "amount" of code is the same as in any functional language though. It's just written in a smaller text file.

Arthur tries to choose primitives carefully so that the amount of steps is smaller than other languages (see the 'product' quote in another comment). So even if you give each symbol an English name, the code will often end up smaller.

In which case it seems like two things are being conflated a lot here: terseness and better primitives. I'm opposed to the first, but very interested in the second. Is there a language you think focuses on approachability and readability but keeps the good parts of K?

k9 (from Shakti) will have optional word equivalents for some symbols (or at least common compositions) by default.

Have you looked at q?

numpy has a lot of k/APLish primitives built in.

fml was also interesting but never made it past the spec stage:

https://www.reddit.com/r/apljk/comments/etpbbf/fml_an_optimi...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com