It's easier to answer questions like this if you quote the specific code you are referring to. (I could try answering, but what if I guessed wrong (about what confused you)? I'm something of a perfectionist and sometimes that means that the slightest issue distracts me onto something else.) And, believe me, I've plenty of other things to distract me! :)
That said, if you want to try answering these questions for yourself (instead of encouraging the j community to perhaps talk about them), you could try running the expressions through trace, both with and without the parenthesis. Thanks, -- Raul On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 11:27 AM, Brian Schott <[email protected]> wrote: > Twice now in this thread, parentheses have made a serious difference in > results. If that difference has been explained I have missed it and would > appreciate an explanation. > > In Pascal's message parens were need around the explicit definition of an > adverb. > > In Jose' s (Pepe's?) message the parens were used as follows and different > results are produced without parens. > > st=. 7!:2@:] ; 6!:2 > > NB. Explicitly... > > controlA_z_ =: 1 : 0 > flag1_z_ =: 1 > o=. u y > flag1_z_ =: 0 > o > ) > > ifC=: 1 : 'if. flag1_z_ do. u y else. y end.' > > ( test=: +: ifC ) > > > > -- > (B=) > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
