My observation was to provide an illustration of relevance and not a
request to dump extraneous features into scalar numbers in J
It is a welcome innovation of J to denote 1r3 which is only relevant
in certain instances and otherwise fine as 0.333333 . I am told this
is included specifically because its relevance to musicians was
suggested to Ken Iverson by David Steinbrook.
My daughter, an architecture student, told me this weekend that she
went on a course to learn about some rendering tools only to find
that the application required you to denote drawings in a programming
language rather than by drawing techniques. The application's
creator not only could not understand her explanation of how this
could be achieved, but was completely dismissive. She told me she
knew I would never do that.
In general, not understanding is a legitimate request for information
but not a refutation of another point of view.
Donna
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 27-Jun-06, at 3:42 PM, Miller, Raul D wrote:
Donna L.Y. wrote:
This information is extremely relevant to an integer Linear
Programming model a point apparently lost on some early users of
IBM's vector processor.
I probably do not understand what information you are trying to
refer to.
If you need to know that 1r3 came from 111%333 then you should
have retained the original values. Talking about 111r333 as
something distinct from 1r3 might be a convenient shorthand in
some application domains, but it's the job of the programmer
to make sure that the proper information is used in the right
fashion. You don't need to dump lots of features into scalar
numbers to accomplish that.
--
Raul
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
