Pascal, Your answer "because it is a multiline explicit definition "hacked" into a single line with ; joins." helped a lot.
> > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Brian Schott <[email protected]> > To: General forum <[email protected]> > Cc: > Sent: Monday, September 16, 2013 11:27:37 AM > Subject: Re: [Jgeneral] Bug in adverb define > > 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=) > > -- (B=) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
