plus over infinity, aka 𝒌 crash course
genesis
exodus
numbers
proverbs
reading code → how to solve it
writing code → three triangles
metrics → apples and oranges
learning plan → gladly beyond
quod tu summum putas gradus est — seneca
Computer languages have been around, but in the beginning was the Word. We will be writing code in a language called 𝒌, but it helps to talk about it first.
𝒌 is different. At first, you will be questioning its design, and it will respond by questioning things that you consider common sense, but soon it will become a constructive conversation, and here is how.
The first thing newcomers frown upon is why the assignment operator is :
instead of =
. But before you close the tab, try a simple thought experiment:
x = x + 1
Most programmers will agree that this expression makes perfect sense, but if you show it to a math guy, be ready to hear "no, it isn't". And once you see what makes him think that way, you will also see why we assign values with :
in k. The above expression looks nonsensical to a 𝒌 programmer for the same reason it does to a math guy, and k will most always evaluate it to false. It is possible to produce a 𝒌 expression where x=x+1
evaluates to true, and once you can, please submit a pull request and say "hello".
𝒌 has a different perspective on some other things as well, but it is not necessarily wrong. It can just as well be right, but in a different way, and this short introduction invites you to look at those things that other way. And we hope they might also feel obvious and natural to you, like x≠x+1
just did.
This crash course is not looking to make you an expert 𝒌 programmer, because that takes a lot of time and effort. Instead, it aims to give enough confidence and motivation for you to continue on your own. We value your time, so we promise it will be fast and violent.
The text cuts a lot of corners on general programming and CS at some expense of readability.
The course is driven entirely by densely annotated code, comments contain essential material.
New syntax is often introduced inline, some is selfexplanatory, some relies on your intuition.
The narrative is linear, all chapters build on previous.
Skipping exercises will halt your progress.
This might feel a bit intense, but we hope the course is still lightweight enough to be completed in one session.
This document is not a 𝒌 reference. The majority of subjects are discussed at depth sufficient to give a good general overview, but by no means exhaustive.
The man behind 𝒌 is a computer scientist by the name Arthur Whitney. He is the principal designer of the language, and he is an iconic figure in a community of some of the most sophisticated programmers and scientists employed by some of the most influential institutions on the planet. Since early 90s, he delivers ever more powerful revisions of a concept he has been refining throughout his career, a system to build very efficient software that transforms large amounts of data into large amounts of money.
That is, 𝒌 enjoys much success in the world of finance, where this kind of problems existed long before the term big data was coined. Many people embraced the 𝒌 way and made successful careers by building solutions using 𝒌, and they appreciate their tool as much as they appreciate the man behind it, and we believe they have their reasons.
There is a good chance that you have heard or read about 𝒌 language — a lot of people know the story — but what is much less likely is that you have ever met a professional 𝒌 programmer. This happens not just because 𝒌 programmers are rare, but also because 𝒌 is not fishing for cheap publicity. This is how we've all heard about a language called 𝒌, but what we mostly get to hear about is how much it sucks to be a Java programmer.
But jokes aside, implementations of similar systems in languages like C++ or Java usually involve thousands of lines of code written by large teams, built on top of complex library stacks and even more complex infrastructure. Such projects are often expensive and inflexible, go over budget and miss deadlines.
In comparison, 𝒌 solutions are typically a few factors of magnitude less code, implemented by small and agile teams, rarely require external dependencies, and ship on time.
At first it could be hard to understand how this can even be true, but imagine the effort of keeping 100 lines of code in sync with rapidly changing requirements and free of bugs, compared to 10,000 lines of code that do the same thing. Against all intuition, it is not 100 times easier, but 10,000 times easier, because the effect of cyclomatic complexity is devastating.
𝒌 is a simple, expressive and powerful computer language.
The power stems from the fact that 𝒌 is designed as a tool of thought. The vocabulary, syntax and the choice of abstractions offered by the language drive you to think about problems in a focused and clear way that quickly takes you to efficient and elegant solutions. And the reason why thinking in terms of 𝒌 is so effective is nothing supernatural: brevity is the soul of wit.
𝒌 programs are concise, the syntax of the language is terse, and there is no boilerplate code to write. In 𝒌, most of the time is spent on thinking about the problem rather than writing and refactoring code or browsing source.
𝒌 runtime environment is an incredibly compact and efficient piece of software.
The entire system is:
a single binary executable
without any external dependencies
that fits in the cache of your CPU
And that gives a selection of fundamental algorithms, data structures, techniques and primitives that withstood the test of decades of production use in some of the world's most demanding data processing environments. Inner components of the system fit together and complement each other to deliver performance. It is not uncommon for 𝒌 newcomers to experience shock when they first see how much can be done with a few precise keystrokes, and how fast.
All of 𝒌 programming takes place in the REPL, an idea that is actually much older than many seem to think. It has been around for at least half a century, and is known as dialogue approach, a live conversation between a human and machine as a flow of questions and answers. And in 𝒌, this conversation is much more fluent than in any other modern REPLdriven system you may be familiar with, because the questions are short and the answers are fast. This is the essence of the way of 𝒌, an experience that all 𝒌 programmers consider immensely satisfying. People who write 𝒌 for living love their jobs.
The only known way to learn how to program is to write programs, so you will need a live environment. As all things 𝒌, it takes very little effort.
We will be using a trial version of 𝒌, which comes without any RAM or useable CPU core limitations. As any 𝒌 programmer will tell you, with great power comes great responsibility, so please don’t accidentally convert too much data into too much money too early.
The 𝒌 interpreter is currently available for Linux
and macOS
on x86_64
architecture, but stay tuned  ARM, WASM, RISCV are in the pipeline, and they will not make you wait.
So, no further ado:
$ npm i @kparc/k g
As all things 𝒌, the development of 𝒌 itself is happening very fast. New builds are published up to several times a week, so make sure you always use the latest version:
$ alias kup="npm i @kparc/k g"$ kup
Start your very first 𝒌 session like so:
The startup banner packs a lot of useful information:
it says  it means 
20190823 12:18:26  timestamp of your 𝒌 build 
40core  cpu cores you can use in 𝒌 
270gb  max workspace alloc size 
avx512  the best your cpu can pull off 
shakti  the company behind 𝒌 
l 

prod  your build is 
If it ever comes to that, please always include your banner in your bug reports.
At any time during a 𝒌 session, you can:
\h
view k reference card
\l
view k change log
\\
quit k session
At this point we highly recommend to avoid issuing any of the above commands, especially the latter.
Practice:
Make sure you have rlwrap
utility installed, and put an alias alias k="rlwrap k"
into your rc file. This makes your spartan 𝒌 development environment a lot more pleasant to use.
Type in your first 𝒌 expressions, and enjoy your first answers:
2+2 /simplest face of k is a calculator4x:42 /: is assign so x is now the answerx=x+1 /= is equal, and of course it isn't0kcc:+/∞ /we knew you'd want to try this onekcc /and what it happens to be is just:█
Wherever you see ∎ in this document, you are invited to try something on your own.
Indeed, the title of this document seems to make sense to the 𝒌 interpreter and evaluates to exactly that, and very soon you will easily infer what it actually means. It is actually quite profound.
As any other language, 𝒌 expects a programmer to observe and follow certain conventions on coding style and terminology in order to understand the code written by the others and let their own code be understood. While some rules of the house of 𝒌 are universal, some are not.
Commenting your 𝒌 code is the best way not to end up coding Java for food, unless you are Arthur Whitney. We dare to assume you are not, so comments start with /
. When used inline, prepend at least one space. Here is an annotated declaration of two variables:
/annotations are your friendsx:42y:42 /now, always and forever
Character ;
in 𝒌 is used for one thing and one thing only, to separate 𝒌 expressions. As you have seen above, 𝒌 doesn't force you to terminate the line explicitly with ;
because newline is also an expression separator. Separator is used the same way and means the same thing everywhere in any context (except comments), e.g. to separate expressions inside a function body, vector declaration, function arguments, etc. Later we will see that separator is also a part of certain language constructs, but it has the same meaning there as well. But by far the most frequent explicit use of the separator you will encounter in the wild is to separate expressions within one line:
x:1; y:2; z:3 /one line, three expressionsz:1;y:2;x:3 /denser version of the above
This is a tricky subject in 𝒌. Basically, what you generally want is no indentation. This means if your 𝒌 expression is getting so large that you are tempted to split it into separate lines, you likely need to refactor or return to the blackboard. Sometimes, however, indentation is fine and even necessary, and it is always one space. Not two, not four, one. Tabs will be frowned upon because they eat up a lot of space, see below.
Variable names in 𝒌 follow a somewhat unusual convention. Capitals are used by 𝒌 programmers very sparingly, which applies both to code and comments. While identifiers in camelCase
can sometimes be tolerated, c_style
identifiers are not permitted at all, since _
is an operator. Identifiers of functions and variables are very often boiled down to an absolute minimum, names 13 characters long are commonplace, which does not impact readability given that their definitions are annotated. Short identifiers might sound like a bad idea to Java programmers who are used to see identifiers longer than 2^8 bytes, but, unlike Java, 𝒌 source requires very little or no scrolling. When the entire program fits in your visual buffer, "cryptic" identifiers are no longer a problem because their annotated declarations are always right in front of you:
kei:42 /kenneth eugene iverson
The subject of code organization will forever remain a major point of controversy in software development. Computer languages have different philosophies on coding style, especially when it comes to three specific keystrokes: \n
, \t
and, less surprisingly, 0x20
. If we define two extremes as "tall, lean, sparse and readable" and "robust, wide, dense and cryptic", then C is a classic example of tlsr
, and 𝒌 is all the way down rwdc
road.
The primary influence of 𝒌 syntax is the most powerful instrument of human reasoning, a mathematical notation. As such, the language actively encourages the programmer to produce very dense and succinct code, which leads to a common pitfall among beginners who are tempted to sacrifice too much readability. As any good program, a good 𝒌 program must remain readable and adequately annotated.
Comments are integral part of the code and also consume space, so boil them down to some reasonable size as well, but don't get too cryptic,
In 𝒌, it is possible to minimize code scrolling or even avoid it completely. When the entire program or component fits in your view, you lose no time on navigating it and switching contexts. For example, every code block in this document fits on a laptop screen and remains readable on mobiles.
Syntax highlighting is essential, and poor highlighting is often worse than none — so choose carefully from 𝒌 syntax packages available for your editor. The best is often the one you wrote yourself, and 𝒌 syntax is extremely regular and simple.
Medium is the message, so we refer you to 𝒌 code presented in this document. Please send pull requests to help us improve it, and if you like the style, it is yours to have.
Bad form in 𝒌 is code bloat. Avoid writing extra code if you can — there is too much of it written already into the world. Remove inessential code, yours or not. But if you absolutely have to write more, make it useful, secure, compact, maintainable, portable and scalable.
practice
We don't know much 𝒌 to practice style yet, so this one will be readonly. Here is a trivial C program formatted in two different ways:
tlsr:
#include <stdio.h>intmain(int argc, char **argv){int x = 'a';for(int i=0; i<26; ++i){putchar(x++);}return 0;}
rwdc:
#include<stdio.h> //k.htypedef int I;#define O putchar#define DO(n,x) {I i=0,_i=(n);for(;i<_i;++i){x;}}
#include"k.h"I main(){I x='a';DO(26,O(x++))}//nsl
Compare their strengths.
The most important terminology in 𝒌 revolves around functions. Functions in 𝒌 are firstclass citizens. 𝒌 has anonymous functions, eval, apply, recursion, and then some. It takes a leap of faith to believe it, but 𝒌 is probably more lispy than certain Lisps, only you don't need to get past any parens. However, since there are no linked lists under the hood, 𝒌 is not Lisp, because it was designed to be fast.
This is an uncommon feature, most languages require you to explicitly declare function arguments. Of course you can also do that in 𝒌 if you want to, but if you don't, a function can have up to three implicit arguments called x
, y
and z
, which means you declare them by simply referencing them in the function body. It is a very convenient feature, not nearly as scary as it sounds:
f:{x+y+z} /f[] takes three argumentsf[1;2;3] /and here is how to call f6e:{[a;b;c] /not so implicit, but why?a+b+c}e[1;2;3] /f with 9 extra keystrokes6f:{x*x} /f[] has only one argumentf 42 /and you can omit brackets1764
Note that when calling a function with three arguments f[1;2;3]
we had to use square brackets and use an expression separator, because each argument passed to a function is an expression in its own right. However, second function only takes one argument, and we were allowed to omit brackets — although we could also say f[42]
.
This illustrates the core principle of 𝒌 syntax — almost everything that you intuitively feel you should be able to omit, can and should be omitted. Top candidates for omission are square []
, round brackets ()
and space 0x20
. The less you type, the better your code will get.
Syntax for explicit argument declaration {[a;b]}
is just a side remark. It is good to know, but we won't see it in this text again.
Function rank is another way of saying valence, a fancy word that describes a simple idea that is extremely important to be understood well. Rank of an operator or a function is basically the maximum count of arguments they take. Two functions shown above have ranks of 3 and 1, respectively.
Two specific ranks are so important that they have their own names. A function or an operator that takes...
one argument is monadic
two arguments is dyadic
As you will see, the vast majority of native operators in 𝒌 have exactly two completely different meanings based on the context where they are used, which is in turn defined by the number of arguments offered to the operator.
For example, when you used your first ever 𝒌 operator in the expression 2+2
, you have used the +
operator in a dyadic context since it received exactly two operands to work on, left and right, so it was inferred to be dyadic + plus
. The monadic + flip
will be introduced later, and has an entirely different meaning.
Also known as function view, is a simply a reference to a function with some arguments preset to a value, and at least one free, or elided argument. For example, if a function of rank 3, f[x;y;z]
, only receives first and third arguments, it will return its projection of rank 1:
f:{x+y+z} /a function of rank threep:f[1;;3] /a projection of f[1;?;3]p 2 /is same as call f[1;2;3]6
An operator is declared to be explicitly monadic if followed by :
. This is commonplace and very often necessary.
+ /contextaware, either monadic flip or dyadic plus+: /always stays a monadic flip, disregarding context
Later on you will see how this works in practice.
You will not get far in this course without a strong grip on the idea that some things in 𝒌 land are monadic and even explicitly monadic, while others are dyadic. Make sure you have it.
On a more general note, functions in 𝒌 can be of rank 1 to 9:
it is not really possible to define a function with no arguments. Rank zero, or niladic functions, do not exist in 𝒌.
a function cannot take more than nine explicit arguments, and some say this is an overly generous limit.
recap
So far you know how to:
add two integers
assign values to variables
declare and call basic functions
be friends with x
, y
and z
tell monadic and dyadic apart
explicitly declare monadic ops
annotate your code
This is a good start, but tells you absolutely nothing about what 𝒌 really is, and from here things will start to get real.
The word atom
is a synonym for scalar value
, or simply scalar
. Every language has them, and in 𝒌 they are as useful as elsewhere. But 𝒌 belongs to a family of vector languages, which means its fundamental type is an ordered set of atoms or other ordered sets.
In 𝒌 parlance, terms array
, list
and vector
are often used interchangeably and refer to the same thing, but we will stick with vector
to avoid confusing you, because vectors are much more general than classic arrays and have nothing to do with linked lists.
x:(0;1;2;3;4) /one way of declaring an integer vectory:0 1 2 3 4 /same effect using more informal syntaxx0 1 2 3 4y0 1 2 3 4a:42 /a scalar variable, an atom with a namev:,42 /a vector of length 1, one integer item
k is strictly "pass by value", i.e. there are no references or pointers being passed around, although it is an illusion created by the underlying implementation. In reality, k avoids making copies of stuff unless it becomes absolutely necessary:
x:0 1 2 3 4 /everything is passed by valuey:x /so this will make a copy of xy /y is a clone, not a reference0 1 2 3 4 /(in reality it only pretends)y:x:0 1 2 3 4 /same effect in one expression/y and x are actually the same/until one of them is modified
The first thing you need to know about vectors is that most operations you expect to work for atoms work equally well for vectors, too:
x:y:0 1 2 3 4 /x and y are twin copiesx+y /pairwise sum of vectors0 2 4 6 8x*y /product is pairwise too0 1 4 9 16x%y /division is %, get usedø 1 1 1 10%0 /ø is nan, void and nulløx=y /compare x to y pairwise1 1 1 1 1 /1 is truthy, 0 is false
Mixing atomic and vector operands makes total sense and is very useful:
x:0 1 2 3 4x+1 /increment all elements1 2 3 4 5x=1 /compare each of x to 10 1 0 0 0x%0 /divide each by 0, ouchø ∞ ∞ ∞ ∞ /∀x∈ℚ (x%0) ∈ {∞,∞,ø}, beware (0%0) = ø, enjoy responsibly3%x /divide 3 by each of x∞ 3 1.5 1 0.75
Indexing is zerobased as you would expect, and if you pass a vector of indices, you get back a vector of items:
x:2 4 8 16 32x[2] /get 3rd element of x8x 2 /no need for brackets8x[1 4] /get 2nd and 5th item4 32 /gives another vectorx 1 4 /no need for brackets4 32y:1 4 /y is an index vectorx y /same as x[y] less []4 32
Pairwise operations on vectors of incompatible shape make much less sense to 𝒌 than division by zero, and will throw an error:
x:0 1 2 3 4y:0 1 2x+yx+y^length error
Note the difference between shape and length. This reminds us that a vector can be composed not just from atoms but from other vectors as well, and there is no practical limit on the depth of nesting. In other words, vectors can have arbitrary shape:
y:(,1;1 1;1 2 1;1 3 3 1) /pascal's triangley,11 11 2 11 3 3 1
Vector arithmetic is penetrating, which means that vector operators apply at depth for as long as operands have compatible shape. It is a good time to introduce the monadic +x
to better see how this works:
mat:(1 2 3;4 5 6;7 8 9) /shall there be mat:mat /a square matrix 3*31 2 34 5 67 8 9tam:+mat /monadic + is 'flip'tam /y is a transposed x1 4 72 5 83 6 9mat=tam1 0 00 1 00 0 1mat>tam0 0 01 0 01 1 0mat+4243 44 4546 47 4849 50 51
practice
First, lets make sure +x flip
operator transposes rectangular matrices just as well as squares, which would be of little surprise. Then try to flip something less obvious, and after that you have two more transformations to apply. Inspect all intermediate results and make sure you follow their logic:
mat:(1 2 3 4;6 7 8 9) /a rectangular matrix+mat /flip it, no big deal1 62 73 84 9t:(,1;1 1;1 2 1;1 3 3 1) /t is triangle vectort:+t /flip it, what gives?t:t>0 /t greater than zero?t:(+t)+t /t transposed plus t?█
No rocket science, all pretty basic, but carry on.
Type system in 𝒌 gets strict when it has to, but also agrees that implicit casts and type coercion have their strengths — especially when done right, which in k they are.
Before we see the examples, the first thing you need to know about types in 𝒌 is that they are divided into two broad classes: vector types and atomic types. That is, a vector with a single element, say, 42
, is not the same type as an atomic integer of the same value. Finally, since functions and other things in 𝒌 are also assignable values, they also have their place in the type system. Those are special types and we will not cover them here in much detail.
Here is a quick overview of basic 𝒌 types and their symbolic names:
atom vect type`i `I int`f `F float`c `C char`n `N name`D `D date`t `T time
This is not very revealing, so lets see them in action. The operator to query the type of anything in 𝒌 is monadic @x
, and if you are not sure what we mean by monadic
, perhaps it is a good time to start over.
@42 /int scalar`i@.5 /float atom`f@0 1 2 /int vector`Iv:0 1 .5 2@v /0.5 promotes vector to float`Fv 1 /2nd item, f is short for 1.01f
Like in C, there is no dedicated type for strings in 𝒌. Strings are just char vectors:
@"k" /"k" is char atom`cs:"kei";@s /s is char vector`Cs 0 /1st element of s"k"
A type called name is the same idea as internalized string found in some other languages. This means that a single instance of an arbitrarily long string can be placed into a global hash table that persists for a lifetime of a 𝒌 process and can later be referenced by its hash key as many times as necessary without creating additional copies of the string.
We could say that in case of names 𝒌 actually passes references instead of values, but they are not true pointers and there is no arithmetic defined for them. Names come handy in many situations, for now lets just see how they quack:
a:`kei /"kei" is now internalized@a /name atom is its hash key`nb:`kei`kei`kei /three references to "kei"@b /vector of string pointers`N@`"ken iverson" /spaces in names, why not?`n$a /$ converts names to chars"kei"
Temporal types in k are date
and time
:
d:19810201 /yyyymmdd, ok to expect iso 8601 compliance@d /NOTE: date atom is `D same as date vector `D`Dt:12:34:56.789 /hh:mm:ss.sss, max resolution is milliseconds@t`tdt:d+t;dt /advanced date ops is a story for another day19810201T12:34:56.789
Dictionaries are maps of keys to values, also known as hashmaps or associative arrays, and they are as useful in 𝒌 as elsewhere, but unlike many languages where this data structure is built in, 𝒌 allows both keys and values to be of any type, both vector and scalar. This might sound a bit confusing at first — since nothing prevents you from, say, constructing a dictionary where keys are themselves dictionaries — but in able hands this oddity becomes a very powerful tool.
Dictionaries have the type `a, and the notation for defining them uses a dyadic operator ! key
:
d:`a`b!(1 2 3;4 5 6) /keys!valuesda1 2 3b4 5 6@d /dict type is `a`ad`a /key lookup (aka d[`a] or d `a)1 2 3!d /dict keys`a`b. d /dict vals (note the space!)1 2 34 5 6
Tables are flipped dictionaries, and they require a separate large discussion. Here, we will only describe their syntax for the sake of completeness. Table type is `A, and notation is the same as dict, only with +x flip
operator prepended. As common sense implies, a dictionary won't flip unless all values are of the same length.
No comments on any of this for now — but if you can follow the logic of what is going on here, you'll agree that in some rare cuircumstances a technology is indeed indistinguishable from magic. See for yourself:
x:`goo`apl`amzy:1 2 3 4 5 6t:+`s`d`p!(x,x;`D$y;1.5*y) /table is a transposed dict@t`At /trades: stock, date, prices d p  goo 20240102 1.5apl 20240103 3amz 20240104 4.5goo 20240105 6apl 20240106 7.5amz 20240107 9select avg p by s from t /pretend you didn't see thiss pamz6.75apl5.25goo3.75
Lambdas are assignable values and have their own type, and more than one:
@{x+y} /type of lambda gives away its rank`2nil:{0} /don't expect nil to have rank zero@nil /niladic functions don't exist in k`1a:{x},{x+x},{x*x} /a vector of lambdas, sure, why nota[2]16 /calls 3rd lambda, same as a[2][16]256
Null values in 𝒌 are typed, integer null is Ø
and float null is ø
. Infinity is a scalar float ∞
. Working with nulls and infinities can be very tricky, and it is very important to pay attention to their types:
n:ø /float null is type float@n`fN:Ø /int null is type integer@N`in=N /equal, but not the same!1@∞ /infinity is a float atom`f
It is evident that nulls and infinities are Unicode glyphs. Although it is very easy to set up keyboard shortcuts for them, there are idiomatic ASCII ways to enter them (but avoid if you can):
0%0 /float null is zero div by zeroø`i$0%0 /int null is rounded float nullØ1%0 /inf is just reciprocal of zero∞%0 /inf via `%x 'inverse` operator∞PI:3.14159265358979323846264338327950288π=PI /synonym of π in ascii, but why1
Composite vector type, or you could also say mix vector, is of special mention. Such vectors are either a mixture of atoms of disparate types, or contain something more complex than atoms, e.g. other vectors:
c:0,1,"a",2,3 /a char impostor among ints, c is mix@c /a mix type symbol is just a backtick`x:(1 2 3;4 5 6;7 8 9) /a vector of vectors is composite toox1 2 34 5 67 8 9@x`
Type casting, both explicit and implicit, is demonstrated by the following examples which also give a general feel of how type coercion behaves. The cast
operator in k is a dyadic t$x
, where t
is a type name and x
is a subject of cast:
1+.5 /int plus float is float, no surprises here1.51f*2 /any float operand promotes result to float2f`i$42.99 /explicit cast from `f to `i drops mantissa42`i$42.0 42.99 /`F to `i will round down the entire vector42 420+"abc" /numeric operands demote `c and `C to ascii97 98 99`c$1+"HAL9000" /add 1 to ascii, cast back to `c, surprise:"IBM:111""012"+"345" /sum ascii codes of chars, result stays `C"ceg"a:1 2 3 /lets start with a nice uniform int vectora[0]:1f /now, replace its 1st element with a float@a /whoops, our int vector got demoted to mix`a:`f$a;@a /explicit cast to float solves the problem`F`i$19810201 /dates represented as ints look like this:1567415674+19810201 /and they are simply offsets in days from:20240101`i$20240101 /so the epoch date itself must be exactly:01+`kei /no math for names, this type is immutable^type error@@42 /what is type name of a type name of int?█
There are things left to be said about the type system, but the expression @@42
above (which evaluates to some kind of wordplay, type name of a type name is name
) urges us to the next section which is all about how to make sense of this expression.
As you must have noticed, the syntax for indexing vectors and calling functions is identical:
l:{x+x} /some monadic function l[x]t:2 4 8 16 /some random integer vectorr:0 3 /index vector: indices of rl[t] /apply function l to each t4 8 16 32t[r] /items of t at indexes in r2 16l[t[r]] /compose: apply l to t at r4 32
What we also know that k actively encourages us to omit brackets whenever possible, so lets do exactly that:
l t r /exactly the same as l[t[r]]4 32
And here is comes: once we drop the brackets, it suddenly becomes absolutely natural to read this expression right to left. Take your time to contemplate and absorb this fact. In very little time you will see how it works in practice, and once you put it to practice yourself, you will agree that this way of functional composition is simple, elegant and intuitive:
k expressions are read, written and evaluated right to left.
But when we say "expressions" we don't mean "programs", and this is a very important distinction:
k programs are read, written and evaluated left to right.
This might sound confusing, but look at the diagram of a small 𝒌 program that consists of three identical expressions l t r
, with parens added for clarity. Further down is the order of evaluation of the entire program, which leaves no room for confusion:
/ L T R/(l t r);(l t r);(l t r)/ I > II > III/(3 2 1);(6 5 4);(9 8 7)
This is another important subject which has to do with the way rivers flow in 𝒌 land.
We all take it for granted that multiplication and division bind stronger than addition and subtraction and should be calculated first, and it feels almost natural that a computer language must have complex precedence hierarchy to do anything useful, and 𝒌 disagrees with that:
There is no operator precedence in 𝒌 expressions unless explicitly overridden by round brackets.
That is, by default all operators in a 𝒌 expression are treated equally and evaluated strictly from right to left, and that includes arithmetic operators, e.g. *
has no precedence over +
. Here are some basic math expressions, annotated with their order of evaluation:
3+2+1 /"take 1, add 2, add 3"63*2+1 /"take 1, add 2, multiply by 3"9(3*2)1 /"take 2, multiply by 3, sub 1"51+3*2 /same as above, without parens5
It is much easier to get used to lack of precedence than you appears at first, and once you do, you will generally want to avoid using parens unless you absolutely have to. The last example from above shows the basic strategy of ditching them: it is usually possible to rearrange expressions so that the order of evaluation becomes linear.
Although precedence override is often inevitable and can be beneficial, it can have an adverse effect on readability. That is, when you read a 𝒌 expression right to left, you want to go fast and uninterrupted, but precedence overrides get in your way.
While writing an expression, think of your reader and try to minimize the use of round brackets.
Now we can revisit the last expression from the previous chapter:
@@42 /"type name of a type name of 42" actually reads backwards:`n /"get 42, apply monadic @, get `i, apply monadic @, get `n"
Now we have a convincing proof that type name of a type name is indeed a name
.∎
practice
Let's revisit the code from the first snippet in this document:
x:(1 2 3;4 5 6;7 8 9)x=x+1 /how can a universal truth be so false?█
Too easy, but we'll make up for it.
This part might be easier to digest than the previous, especially if you are familiar with functional programming. The title, borrowed without permission from the legendary k resource, says it all  you will not find a 𝒌 construct that resembles an explicit for
loop, and although there is a while
construct in 𝒌, it is almost never used in practice.
And this is not just to avoid untold damages from trivial errors people keep making in their loop definitions. The main reason explicit loops are banned from 𝒌 is because it offers something better. The idea that displaces them is a simple and strong abstraction called adverbs, but before we see them in action, it helps to understand why they are called that way:
An adverb is a modifier that takes some verb (which is a short way of saying "a userdefined function or native operator"), and makes that verb's action applicable to an input vector in some desirable way to produce an output, which can be a scalar value or another vector, depending on which adverb is used.
A good example of how adverbs replace loops is sum
. Say, we have an input in:1 2 3 4 5
, and what we want is to obtain a sum of its elements. Thinking in implicit loops suggests something like:
int sum(int[]in){int i=0,acc=0;for(;i<sizeof(in);++i)acc+=in[i];return acc;}
But imagine if you could state the problem to a computer like this:
"put a +
between all adjacent items and give me the grand total"
And that is the simplest way to describe what 𝒌 adverb over
does when it is used to modify dyadic +
. Only over
, as all other adverbs, is general and will happily modify any dyadic operator or function. Described more formally, over
looks more like this pseudocode:
if x
is an atom, return x
set acc
to 0 (a.k.a. accumulator)
while next x
, set acc
to the result of v[acc;next x]
return acc
The above is nothing else but a general case of the explicit loop found in sum()
, as well as of all other explicit loops of this particular family. In functional speak, one would say adverb over
folds a vector of values and reduces them into a scalar.
And since over
is just v/x
𝒌, this is how sum
function looks like:
s:{+/x} /s is 'plus over x's 1 2 3 4 515
It is a good moment to look back at the C version, one last time — and be surprised to hear that its for
loop declaration contains an ancient, but ever so popular bug, which 𝒌 version does not because spotting bugs in +/x
is considerably easier. Besides, even if the C code wasn't broken, it would only work for 32bit integers.
You could be tempted to see of what other use over
could be. Let's introduce a new k operator, !x til
, and implement another obvious candidate for over
:
x:!9 /! is til, get first n integersx /tada, we have all ints up to 80 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8fact:{*/1j+!x} /fact x 'mul over 1 plus til x'fact 202432902008176640000j
Now that we have parted ways with loops, and discussed over
in detail, it is time to meet the rest of six 𝒌 adverbs. Please welcome the magnificent six, and note that only most trivial use cases are shown:
adverb over is f/x
adverb scan is f\x
where f
is a dyadic
verb and x
is an input vector
a:0 1 2 3 4 /some data+/a /puts a + between items, 0+1+2+3+410 /and returns the final result only+\a /scan returns intermediate results0 1 3 6 10 /running sum, aka debugger of over
adverb each is f'x
where f
is a monadic
verb and x
is an input vector
d:42,"a",`kei /some composite vectorfn:{@x} /some monadic functionfn'd /apply fn to each of d`i`c`n /the type of each itemf:{1%x},{x*x} /reciprocal and square{x 25}'f /call each of f for 250.04 625
adverb eachleft is x f\:y
adverb eachright is x f/:y
where f
is a dyadic
verb and x
and y
are left and right inputs, either vectors or atoms
10 20 30\:5 /eachleft does (105),(205),(305)5 15 25 /each of left, substracted by right5/:0 20 30 /eachright does (50),(520),(530)5 15 25 /left, substracted by each of right
adverb eachprior is x f':y
and (f':)x
first form is seeded eachprior
where f
is a dyadic
verb, and x
is a seed value and y
is an input vector
second form is seedless eachprior
where f
is a dyadic
verb, and x
is an input vector
2+':4 8 16 /seeded eachprior gives (2+4),(4+8),(8+16)6 12 24 /sum 1st item and seed, then sum each item and its prior(+':)4 8 16 /seedless eachprior gives (4),(4+8),(8+16)4 12 24 /first item stays as is, then sum each item and its prior
This doesn't seem like much, adverbs seem to be doing pretty basic stuff. But hold that thought for a minute.
recap
We have seen:
what 𝒌 type system looks like
how basic vector and atom math works
which way to read and comprehend 𝒌 code
what is the only existing precedence rule
why there is no for
and why there are adverbs
practice
Consider a slightly less trivial example of eachleft
working together with x*y multiply
on two vector operands:
x:!9 /a vector of integers from 0 til 8x+:1;x /add 1 to each of x, same as x:x+11 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9x*\:x /what would be x times eachleft x?█
Bonus questions:
kcc:+/∞ /how come k sums up to infinity this fast?kcc█+\(1+!42)%0 /how about a running sum of 42 infinities?█
Make sure you can follow the logic of these examples before advancing to the next chapter, where things will get a lot less innocent. But if you didn't find the exercise challenging enough, here is another one:
Extra bonus:
q:7;GF:!q;q\GF*\:GF /what does GF stand for?█/`c$97+2/:+2\:32 458 1172 1443 275
The title of this chapter is borrowed from a legendary book published in 1945, a small volume by mathematician George Pólya where he shows how to tackle problems and arrive to solutions. It is a very inspiring read.
Let's tackle a little problem. We will look at a 𝒌 function that actually does something very useful and implements a familiar algorithm. The subject of the game is to figure out how it is implemented in 𝒌 and to identify the algorithm. It is very useful to dissect all of it on paper, so put your interpreter aside for now.
So, here is the code:
/what is f[], and can we read it?f:{$[2>#?x;x;,/f'x@&:'~:\x<*1?x]}
This little monster is deliberately designed to make as little sense as possible at first glance, but once we take it apart, we hope you'll agree it is actually very simple and readable:
f:{$[2>#?x;x;,/f'x@&:'~:\x<*1?x]}f:{...} /f is a function, that is a good startf:{.x.} /f takes only one implicit argument, xf:{.f.} /f clearly calls f, so it is recursive$[?;?;?] /the entire body of f is nothing else but$[c;t;f] /a ctf cond, aka ifthenelse aka ternary2>#?x /c: boolean conditionx /t: do this if c is 1,/f'x@&:'~:\x<*1?x /f: do that if c is 02>#?x /we don't how to read this, but it is clear that f[]/halts recursion when it evaluates to 1, returning x/so lets find out what it means, going right to left/we have two new operators, both in monadic context:/monadic ?x is 'distinct' unique elements of x/monadic #x is 'count' count the elements of x#?x /'count distinct' count unique elements of x2>#?x /'greater' true if count distinct x is less than 2$[2>#?x;x;...] /"if x has <2 unique items, return x, otherwise ..."
Coffee break, here is what we know so far:
the function is recursive
its overall control flow
the condition that stops recursion
This gives us confidence to wrestle down the last part, the recursion step:
,/f'x@&:'~:\x<*1?x /this must be the recursion step, read right to left:x:4 0 1 2 /a small dataset to help us see what is going on herernd:1?x /x?y is 'find': picks x random elements from vector yrnd /list with one random item from x,2rnd:*rnd;rnd /*x is 'first': return the head element of a vector x2cmp:x<rnd /bool vector of 1s where x[n]<rnd, 0s where otherwisecmp0 1 1 0/~x is 'not': boolean ¬x, non0 turns 0, all 0 turn 1mask:~:\cmp /explicit 'not' scan: returns cmp and negation of cmpmask0 1 1 01 0 0 1/&x is 'where': return indices of x where x are not 0idx:&:'mask /explicit 'where' each: apply 'where' to each of maskidx1 2 /mask[0] has 1s at indices 1 and 20 3 /mask[1] has 1s at indices 0 and 3pts:x@idx /dyadic @ is 'index': elements of x at indices in idxpts0 1 /list of items in x less than pivot rnd4 2 /list of items in x greater or equal to pivot rndpts:x@&:'~:\x<*1?x /"partition x by pivot: items < rnd and items >= rnd"x:f'pts /adverb each: apply f to each partition, recurse down,/x /,/ is 'raze': unnest aka flatten a vector of vectors,/(1 2 3;4 5 6) /in other words, raze flattens first level of nesting1 2 3 4 5 6
Note that it is the first time we have seen rank override in action. In both cases, explicit monadics are passed to an adverb — and this is a very typical use case.
Now that we know what every specific part does, we can zoom out and see the big picture. Feel free to use the interpreter to play around and test your ideas.
And of course, f
is nothing else but:
qs:{$[2>#?x;x;,/qs'x@&:'~:\x<*1?x]} /qsort on rand pivoti:9 2 5 5 1 8 1 3 6 1 /a hairy int shufflef:2.6 ∞ 8.6 π 1.7 ∞ 3.5 5.6 /a π in a float soupc:"edrofgtnljgrpliifp" /a char entropy poolmess:(i;f;c)qs'mess /restore order quick█
And of course this is not the quickest quicksort
ever written, but this is just a toy. In real life you would simply use the builtin operator which is a lot more efficient:
^3 2 1 /monadic ^x is 'sort'1 2 3sort:^:' /explicit 'sort each'(qs'mess)~(sort mess) /x~y 'match' operands1\t:10000 qs'mess /apply qs 10000 times█\t:10000 sort mess /fix 10000x more mess█
As you see, native sort is incomparably faster. But what our DIY sort function is very good for is to demonstrate the principle of doing more with less, and that is what 𝒌 is all about.
Check out examples of quicksort
in the wild in C++, Python, JavaScript and Java.
recap
Previously we have seen:
monadic !x til (first x integers)
monadic %x inverse (reciprocal)
monadic +x flip (transpose)
monadic $x string
monadic @x type
monadic ^x sort
dyadic t@x cast
dyadic x:y assign
dyadic x=y equal
And qs
code brought a few more:
ctf cond $[c;t;f]
monadic ?x distinct
monadic #x count
monadic `*x first
monadic ~x not
monadic &x where
monadic ,/x raze
dyadic x@y index
dyadic x~y match
dyadic x?y find
Finally, you are now equipped with the most ubiquitous system routine:
\t:n expr
benchpress an expression n
times, result is in milliseconds
Although this is still a small part of 𝒌 operator arsenal, if you can do quicksort
with this much, you can do a lot more. And then add vector arithmetic, and then take everything to the power of six adverbs.
practice
take another good look at the code of qs
function
retrace the steps of the code analysis
in a new 𝒌 session, reproduce qs
from scratch
It sounds much harder than it really is. It might take more than one attempt, but you will be amazed how fast you will get there. However, before advancing to the next chapter, make sure that you do.
Among other things, the annotated breakdown of qs
code gives a good impression of what is typically going on inside of 𝒌 programmer's head — but tells you nothing about how fast it usually happens. A proficient 𝒌 programmer would read and understand qs
in well under two minutes. With a bit more practice, you will agree that reading 𝒌 programs is easy and fun.
It is time to write our first 𝒌 program, and this time around there will be a lot less handholding. We will solve the classic Project Euler p18, also known as p67:
By starting at the top of the triangle below andmoving to adjacent numbers on the row below, themaximum total from top to bottom is 23:→3↑7 42 ↑4 68 5 ↑9 39 + 4 + 7 + 3 = 23
Problems 18 and 67 are simply two bigger triangles, and the challenge is to find the sum of maximum paths in them. While 18 can be solved by bruteforce, 67 can not, but the efficient algorithm is absolutely trivial. It is given away in the example above: we simply need to fold rows going bottom up, like so:
8 5 9 38 9 9 /max+ + + /sum2 4 610 13 15 /out13 15 /max+ + /sum7 420 19 /out20 /max+ /sum323 /out
It is easy to see that the key to the solution is a function that reduces the current row (max
) and merges it into the next (sum
). It expects two arguments, i.e. both rows to work with, and returns out
. That's all we need to implement it:
r4:8 5 9 3 /take two bottom rows to assist thinkingr3:2 4 6042 /xy is max: returns largest of operands421_1 2 3 /x_y is drop: discards x items of a list2 3':r4 /max eachprior: get max element pairwise8 8 9 91_':r4 /drop first result of seedless eachpriorr3+1_':r4 /pairwise sum: merge bottom row into top10 13 15row:{y+1_':x} /row reduction operation, x bottom, y uprow[r4;r3] /r4 and r3 are fine, so should be others10 13 15
Great, we have the reduction function, now let's apply it over the test triangle to make sure it folds it into what we expect. Since we are reducing a vector into an atom, it is abundantly clear which adverb we want to use:
t:(,3;7 4;2 4 6;8 5 9 3)t /monadic x is reverse the order of vector8 5 9 32 4 67 4,3row/t /apply row reductor over reversed triangle,23*row/t /*x is first: simply return the first item23mxpath:{*{y+1_':x}/x} /maximum path in triangle vectormxpath t23
Looks like the mxpath
is doing pretty well. Let's fetch the input file for the problem 67, load it, parse it and solve it:
/backslash cmd executes an os command directly from k:\curl https://projecteuler.net/project/resources/p067_triangle.txt > p67.txtlines:0:"p67.txt" /0:x reads a text file as vector of lineslines 2 /just to make sure we have something real"52 40 09"t:`k?'lines /parse each line of input as k expressiont 252 40 9#t /a bigger triangle, but not a bigger deal100mxpath t /returns max path sum, the solution to 67█
We didn't tell you do this, but the complete program can also be written as a single 𝒌 expression:
*{y+1_':x}/`k?'0:"p67.txt" /load, parse and fold█
recap
We have seen some new stuff:
shell \cmd
dyadic xy max
dyadic x_y drop
monadic x reverse
monadic 0:x load text
practice
Reproduce mxpath
from scratch in a new 𝒌 session, same way you did with qs
.
Find a way to load and parse the triangle from problem 18, and solve it using your own code.
Verify solutions for 18 and 67 on Project Euler.
As you know, once you provide a correct answer to an Euler problem, you can browse its discussion forum. You might want to check out some other solutions to 18 and 67 in other computer languages.
Use \t:n
to assess the upper bound of the algorithm.
There is no new material in this small chapter, so we can go straight to practice.
practice
Many things in life can only be understood in comparison. Compare functionality of these two programs:
package com.less.with.more.doing.sort;public final class qs{public void s(int[] x){}}
qs:{$[2>#?x;x;,/qs'x@&:'~:\x<*1?x]}
Now, compare the source code of these two:
import java.util.Arrays;public class S{public static void main(String[] a){int[] x={5,4,3,2,1};Arrays.sort(x);System.out.printf("%s",Arrays.toString(x));}}
$ echo "^5 4 3 2 1"  k1 2 3 4 5
Finally, compare the size of their runtimes:
252M May 17 13:59 jdk8u211macosxx64.dmg79M May 17 13:50 jre8u211macosxx64.dmg109K May 17 13:54 k.tgz
We have covered a lot of ground, good time to put things into perspective. Below is a complete map of 𝒌 operators, and those marked with bullets you have already seen and used at least once:
x+y +x: ● assign+ ● add ● flip ● subtract ● negate* ● multiply ● first% ● divideby ● inverse& ◦ minand ● where ● maxor ● reverse< ● less ◦ up> ● more ◦ down= ● equal ◦ group~ ● match ● not! ● key ● enum, ● catenate ● list^ ◦ except ● sort# ◦ take ● count_ ● drop ◦ floor? ● find ● distinct@ ● index ● type. ◦ apply ● value$ ● padcast ● string
It really feels like we have explored more than we didn't, and it is huge progress indeed. But many things remain to be discovered, because operators is only one aspect of 𝒌 — and this short introduction could not possibly cover everything.
We conclude with a list of subjects that you are now ready to explore on your own:
𝒌 language  𝒌 platform 
additional 𝒌 operators  debugging and securing 𝒌 systems 
tables and ksql language  building clients and servers in 𝒌 
vector aggregates  benchmarking, testing and tracing 
entropy sources, math primitives  disk i/o, persistence and streaming 
advanced use of adverbs, threads  ipc and distributed workloads 
native csv, tsv, json and utf  fault tolerance and monitoring 
integrated cryptography core  scripting, deployment, os tuning 
nanosecond time, datetime math  interop with python, julia and c 
𝒌expressions, `0  tech support and user community 
design of internal components  𝒌 resources, tools and packages 
Although ee cummings opened his famous poem with words somewhere i have never travelled, it seems that some 𝒌 programmers prefer to read poetry backwards. That explains a lot about the title of our final chapter.
dream a little bigger ∎