> From: Raul Miller
>
> pad=: adverb define
> adj1=: <.m%2
> adj2=: m-1
> (-@(adj2 + ]) {. (adj1 + ]) {. [) (#m) {. $
> )
>
> 5 5 pad i. 3 3
[snip]
>
> padded=:conjunction define
> u;.n y
> :
> x u;.n x pad y
> )
>
> Example use
> 3 3 <padded _3 i.4 4
Raul, your proposal sounds useful to me.
My question is about the details of your current implementation - hoping to
learn something!
Are there advantages of defining pad as an adverb rather than a verb? i.e. Why
not:
pad=: dyad define
adj1=: <.x%2
adj2=: x-1
((-@(adj2 + ]) {. (adj1 + ]) {. [) (#x) {. $) y
)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
