On 11 April 2011 17:45, Raul Miller <[email protected]> wrote:
> I am not sure if this mean that, for example, the definition of +
> would need to conclusively define the following concepts:
>
> o   numbers
> o   arrays
> o   rank

That would be an extremely perverted characterization of all I said.
If this is some kind of a joke, then consider me lacking the type of
sense of humour that would have allowed me to appreciate it.

> http://www.jsoftware.com/help/dictionary/d300.htm uses -/ in a way
> that can only be valid for right-left computation.

Ah, great!  So, to see a meaningful, non-trivial example of what /
does, one has to read about determinants?
Would it not be simpler to define / properly, and in addition, give an
example of, say, alternating sum (-/3 5 8 2 === 3-5-8-2 === 4)
-- both in the /'s own article?

> I do not think this is possible without including some rigorous
> constraints on the background of the reader (and the result would
> necessarily be scattered around for people lacking that background).

Consider replacing the vague first sentence of
http://www.jsoftware.com/help/dictionary/d420.htm
with
    For y = y1...yn and n>1, u/y is equivalent to y1 u y2 u ... u yn.
    If 1=#y, the result of u/y is y.
This describes what / currently does (except the 0=#y case).
Where are the `rigorous constraints on the background of the reader'
that you mentioned?

> Unless 0=#y (which is explicitly treated), u/y necessarily has _1+#y
> instances of u.  This follows immediately from the first sentence at
> http://www.jsoftware.com/help/dictionary/d420.htm

In my understanding, it doesn't follow.  Apparently we have differing
notions of logical deducibility.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm

Reply via email to