2&^ (,~ + ,)&0 1: Previous-generation interpreters allowed (illicitly) one to produce automatically tacit verbs equivalent to explicit one-liner verbs of this kind; alas, this is no longer possible because current-generation interpreters do not allow verbs to produce verbs (or rather it is a lot more difficult to do so).
On Sun, Aug 13, 2023 at 1:55 AM Elijah Stone <[email protected]> wrote: > I will note that, with my proposed n:, this would be trivial: (0&, + > ,&0)^:(2&^ n:)@1 > > You can hack a direct translation with a right argument: ] (0&, + > ,&0)@]^:(2^[) 1: > > On Sat, 12 Aug 2023, 'Nollaig MacKenzie' via Chat wrote: > > > numtt=: 3 : '((,~ 0:) + (, 0:)) ^: (2^y) 1’ > > > > calculates, for the possible truth-tables of y variables a list of the > > those which have 0 1s, 1 1, 2 1s ….. > > > > e.g. > > > > numtt 2 > > 1 4 6 4 1 > > > > numtt just produces the appropriate row of Pascal’s Triangle. > > It’s a trivial little verb, but I’m bothered by the fact that > > I can’t see a way to make it tacit. > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
