Donna L.Y. wrote: > 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 .
Ah... I think you're talking about the extra precision of rational numbers (when compared to floating point numbers)? > In general, not understanding is a legitimate request for information > but not a refutation of another point of view. I apologize if it seemed like I was attempting to refute your point of view. I was attempting to address several potential points which had been raised in this thread. The "refutation" was aimed at a point which was independent of the issue you were talking about. [In other words, my "I may not understand" comment should be read, in retrospect, as "I did not understand", and should be taken to mean that the following comments were not relevant to your point.] Thanks, -- Raul ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
