The implementation should be changed, but not for the reason you stated. x (m&v) y gives exactly the same results whether m&v has ranks 0 _ or _ _ . The differences arise when m&v is composed with other verbs, and in such situations unbounded ranks are preferred. (The same considerations apply for u&n .)
Thanks to Sam Tardieu for finding and reporting this error. ----- Original Message ----- From: Dan Bron <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Thursday, July 13, 2006 6:40 am Subject: Re: [Jbeta] Bond conjunction > >According to > http://www.jsoftware.com/books/help/dictionary/d630n.htm,>the > ranks of m&v and u&n should be _ _ _. I think it should read _ 0 _ > >instead, which corresponds to the implementation. > > I would suggest instead that the implementation be changed to > match the definition. We want to be able to specify more than a > scalar for the power. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
