Roger Hui wrote: > _. is specified to be less than __ (negative > infinity) for to enable an algorithmic (implementation) > advantage.
If you specify that _. < __ then what is the result of <./'' ? Would it be _. or __ as currently? I think _. is a bad idea, because then the interpreter itself would be introducing the _. problem. If it's __ as present, then you break the relationship that x > <./'' . Also this statement: > If you are going to have a TAO, obviously _. should be less > than _ (infinity). Is equally applicable to __ . That is, _. should be greater than __ (negative infinity). So, were I you, I would not "specify" that _. < __ . Let the TAO of arrays with _. remain undefined, and let the implementation do what it chooses. -Dan -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/My-Configuration-tp15116989s24193p15341017.html Sent from the J Beta mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
