Gerry Lowry wrote: > 1 111 > _ and __________ > 3 333 > > are equivalent BUT > > when the first fraction is used to represent > the second fraction, as in 1r3 then there > is a loss of information, i.e., the fact that > one is dividing 111 by 333. > > In most cases, such a loss of factual information is irrelevant.
In most cases, it's better than irrelevant -- this loss of information is a tremendously good thing. Most of the time, the information that is lost is noise -- and if you need to know the exact expression, you can go look at the original script. If you need to know the date and time when the operation was invoked, you can record that in user defined code. Etc. Of course, if you go that route, you'll have to think deeply about what it is that you are trying to accomplish. Is 1+1 performed at 2am the same as 1+1 performed at 3pm? Is 3 apples equivalent to 3 oranges? You could spend forever simply dealing with the potential issues surrounding the issues associate with 0+1. (Assuming that that's what interests you.) > Regardless, what I was really attempting to demonstrate > is that I would rather see > 0.33333333333333333333333333333333... > in preference to 1r3. You can write your own formatting verb. Or, if you could provide the specs, someone else could write one for you. (Do you always want to see 32 digits after the decimal point? Under what conditions should the ellipses appear?) -- Raul ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
