Yet another animation :)

i've posted a second option on the extended version of the Conjugate Animation. 
It is the second large screen under the conjugate section at: 
http://www.jsoftware.com/jwiki/Vocabulary/plus
I think it is getting pretty close to an effective visual presentation, but I 
would love to hear feedback.

Cheers, bob

On -Mar25-2010, at -Mar25-20105:15 PM, bob therriault wrote:

> Hi everyone,
> 
> There is a new extended, large animation for Plus (+) at:http: 
> //www.jsoftware.com/jwiki/Vocabulary/plus
> It is a bit longer than the previous ones, but I think it covers a great deal 
> of information targeted at the level of a newcomer. Let me know what you 
> think. I think there will also be a much shorter reference version, for those 
> that don't need the extended version.
> 
> Cheers, bob
> 
> On -Mar21-2010, at -Mar21-20107:18 AM, bob therriault wrote:
> 
>> Thanks Harvey,
>> 
>> Something had bothered me about moving the right argument over the left, but 
>> I couldn't put my finger on it. The data/control relationship between x and 
>> y may have been part of it. I would guess that this would mean the moving 
>> the right argument in the 'reverse' cases of Divide (%), Minus (-), Sort 
>> (/:)(\:) etc. There are so many useful ideas that turn up as we stumble 
>> along this road!
>> 
>> Cheers, bob
>> 
>> On -Mar20-2010, at -Mar20-20109:20 PM, PackRat wrote:
>> 
>>> bob therriault wrote:  
>>>> I have a few questions about the covering the numbers. Does it make
>>>> a difference to you which argument is placed on top when the scalar
>>>> arguments are superimposed?
>>> 
>>> Well, when I was first starting to learn J here, I was under the 
>>> impression from various posts on the Programming Forum that "y" (the 
>>> right argument) was USUALLY (not always!) the main data that was 
>>> operated upon (or controlled) by "x" (the left argument).  (I may be 
>>> all wet with this understanding, but I interpreted that to be what the 
>>> experts and gurus here indicated--and that's what I shared with others 
>>> as I tried to proselytize J before I retired from librarianship.)
>>> 
>>> So, *if* one set of data should remain stationary while the other 
>>> moves, it makes sense to me that the righthand data should remain 
>>> stationary and that the lefthand data should move (or go on top of the 
>>> righthand data).  This would be especially useful, I think, with 
>>> primitives like # (copy), using a boolean left argument and a literal 
>>> (or numeric) right argument.
>>> 
>>>> I am also considering dissolving in the result as the numbers collide
>>>> (with a glow to indicate the operation). 
>>> 
>>> That's essentially what I've been thinking of suggesting (you beat me 
>>> to it!) and seems very effective to me as a former teacher and somewhat 
>>> J newbie!
>>> 
>>> Harvey
>>> 
>>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> 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