Regarding k vs j, I will just say that ngn and I both agree that both the k and j array models are far more coherent than bqn. And that k is slow for multidimensional arrays ('mangle your data so it's fast in lists' is a poor response). And leave it at that :)
C is a historical accident. Its existence makes sense in context. Its continued usage only makes sense in context of artificial social factors. There is no reason why we cannot write all software in high-level languages except perhaps when targeting microcontrollers. (For example, there are strategies that can be employed to reduce the rate of memory errors in general-purpose code written in languages without automatic memory management, but there is not much reason to learn these strategies when pretty much the only code that really has to be written without automatic memory management is the memory management code itself, which is hardly 'general purpose'.) The extent to which it makes sense for people to understand the low-level details of the machine is a separate issue I won't express an opinion on here.
strong words. in the context of civil aviation, for example, there is a fine line between incident and accident. in our context, an accident is COBOL/ABAP, which is, thank god almighty, not as ubiquitous as c, but sadly ubiquitous enough. JavaScript is a separate issue i won’t express an opinion on here :)
> k is slow for multidimensional arrays
this is true if we can agree on “k is slow for very multidimensional arrays of very small lengths”. yes, i wouldn’t recommend k as first choice for neural network inference, although it can be done and looks like a typical k program, that is pretty neat (proof below).
k on 32bit systems (notably, riscv and wasm32) have been a contention point between atw and his associates a few years ago, but a deal has been struck, and we now run k everywhere. the first bare metal risc-v build is about four years old now. and yes, it took some doing in the low level department.
C is a historical accident. Its existence makes sense in context. Its continued usage only makes sense in context of artificial social factors. There is no reason why we cannot write all software in high-level languages except perhaps when targeting microcontrollers. (For example, there are strategies that can be employed to reduce the rate of memory errors in general-purpose code written in languages without automatic memory management, but there is not much reason to learn these strategies when pretty much the only code that really has to be written without automatic memory management is the memory management code itself, which is hardly 'general purpose'.) The extent to which it makes sense for people to understand the low-level details of the machine is a separate issue I won't express an opinion on here.