English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

It is said by non-APL-programmers that APL code is hard to read and that it is unstructured. Here we argue that APL-programmers may refute this assertion by pointing out some misunderstandings, but admittedly a final analysis will show a deeper truth in these criticisms. We will show that APL gives ample opportunity for unstructured code. Two proposals are presented to address this problem.The first rejects the developed convention for labelling and suggests the adoption of a proper style of programming enforced by a new standard of labelling. This standard will abolish unstructured code. Both negative and positive aspects of this proposal are discussed.The second proposal revives an old idea of introducing one single proper control structure into the language. This would make the current jump (&amp;rarr;) superfluous and enforce structured code.

L-one-two-three (L1:..L2:..L3:) considered harmful