What a nice exposition, I hope taken in good spirit!

In general, it is the main thing I have always liked most about APL 
and J - that is, when there is something I want to do, I think about 
it and try my suspicion. More often than not, it does what I 
suspected/expected.

This is the opposite in any other computer language I know of .... 
there is no alternative to looking it up in a fat manual - many times 
with lots of examples because the action is contrary to (my) 
intuition...

- joey


At 19:21  -0500 2010/03/08, Dan Bron wrote:
>David Ward Lambert wrote:
>>   I'd like to convert rational to float.  What, please, is a better way?
>>     1.001 * 2r5  NB. unsatisfying.
>
>Since  x: 2%5  converts  0.4  to  2r5  we might expect that  (x:^:_1) 2r5
>would convert  2r5  to  0.4  :
>
>          (x:^:_1) 2r5
>       0.4
>         
>and indeed it does.  Moreover, since we know the dyad  x:  accepts a range
>of "function codes" as right arguments, which apply useful transformations
>to its left argument, we might suspect it provides one for this kind of
>transformation.  For mnemonic reasons, we might even expect this function
>code to be  _1  (to invoke the concept of inversion):
>
>          _1 x: 2r5
>       0.4
>         
>and indeed it is.  Of course, this latter was just a suspicion; we could've
>canonically confirmed it by reading the definition of the dyad  x:  :
>
>       http://www.jsoftware.com/help/dictionary/dxco.htm
>
>-Dan
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm

Reply via email to