Bob,

I still think leaving the plus alone on the left, and moving  the right 
argument as a ghost over on top of the plus, shows what is happening 
more clearly, while keeping some semblance of the original J code. This 
can also extend to vectors and matrices. With vectors and matrices, you 
don't have to replicate the plus to line up with all of the numbers. 
Just center the vector or array of numbers over the left plus, and then 
make the conjugation, solidify the array, and slide it down below the  
original

I believe that all of the videos should display the initial equation as 
close as possible to the actual J code, except with the numerical vector 
or array replacing the variable name. Then the right argument should be 
ghosted and moved either over the operator, or the left argument 
depending on whether you are showing a monadic or dyadic function. The 
result can then be shown, un-ghosted, and slid below the original 
equation. In all cases, the original equation is left alone. with the 
final result shown below it

One interesting ramification of this process is that more complex J 
expressions can be demonstrated using the the same paradigm.  Starting 
with the right argument, it is ghosted and moved to the left, the first 
function is performed, the result solidified, and then ghosted again, 
moved to the left and the next function  performed, solidified, ghosted, 
moved, etc. When the final answer is arrived at, it is solidified and 
moved below the original equation. This can also clarify the 
right-to-left evaluation process as well.

This "ghost-moving-solidifying"  process can be used to demonstrate what 
is going on with all of the primitives, as well as more complex J 
expressions. In all cases the start is the J code, which should never 
change.

Skip Cave

bob therriault wrote:
> Hey everyone,
>
> The longer and larger version of Conjugate is now posted at: 
> http://www.jsoftware.com/jwiki/Vocabulary/plus
> Comments regarding speed, movement, content and clarity are welcome 
> (especially from newcomers). Is this a useful animation?
>
> Cheers, bob
>
> On -Mar12-2010, at -Mar12-20108:17 AM, bob therriault wrote:
>
>   
>> I love that quote Catherine,
>>
>> Going back to your frustration at  the 'hiding' of the Conjugate (+) 
>> operation in vectors and matrices, I realized last night that the solution 
>> may not be in showing the way the individual instances of Conjugate work on 
>> each atom of a matrix, but by using more scalar examples initially to show a 
>> wider range of inputs and outputs for Conjugate. 
>>
>> Today, i'll work at putting together a 'Club Mix' of the shorter animation. 
>> It'll have more examples, be larger and run a little longer. This might be a 
>> bridge between the short reference version and the longer tutorial version 
>> that may include interaction and/or voice-over. If both versions were kept 
>> on the reference page the user would have a choice between a quick check, or 
>> a more extended description.
>>
>> Cheers, bob
>>
>> On -Mar11-2010, at -Mar11-20104:14 PM, Catherine Lathwell wrote:
>>
>>     
>>> To quote Ken, when I first talked to him about the doc project... "Maybe all
>>> that Art School is good for something after all!"  :)
>>>
>>> shhhhhh.... don't tell I didn't know how J does minus!  :)
>>>
>>> C
>>>
>>> On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 7:00 PM, Devon McCormick <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>       
>>>> Catherine - APL uses the same character for the same thing - it's just
>>>> positioned differently.
>>>>
>>>> BTW - your feedback is particularly valuable - please continue...
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>>
>>>> Devon
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 6:28 PM, Catherine Lathwell <[email protected]
>>>>         
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>           
>>>>> What's the deal with the _ character?  Is this how J works these days?
>>>>>           
>>>> I'm
>>>>         
>>>>> not really up on the J vocabulary, so I didn't understand conjugate
>>>>>           
>>>> before
>>>>         
>>>>> this... so it took me a couple of runs to figure out that it's *minus
>>>>>           
>>>> *you
>>>>         
>>>>> mean. My first few rounds, I was scratching my head trying to figure out
>>>>> what the heck you need an underscore in your number for.
>>>>>
>>>>> ...
>>>>>           
>>>> --
>>>> Devon McCormick, CFA
>>>> ^me^ at acm.
>>>> org is my
>>>> preferred e-mail
>>>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
>>>>
>>>>         
>>>
>>> -- 
>>> Catherine Lathwell
>>> http://www.aprogramminglanguage.com
>>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> 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
>
>
>   
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm

Reply via email to