I started using {rho}0 to denote the empty list
in APL because (a) it is shorter than 0{rho}0
(b) it does not depend on {quad}io like {iota}0
does (c) it has right "type" where '' does not.
>From APL to J {rho}0 got changed to $0.
Of course strictly speaking it should be "an empty
list" rather than "the empty list". But the
differences between the various empty lists are
more amusing than significant. When I was a mere
pup I used to pester and annoy the APL implementers
with questions like: What is the difference
between ({iota}0),'' and '',({iota}0) and why?
I guess payback exists after all.
----- Original Message -----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wednesday, March 14, 2007 1:56 pm
Subject: Re: [Jgeneral] definition of a:
> The" weather" comment is funny but as I said: "I am from a
> different
> cultural background" so making fun of my mistakes in English is
> fine with
> me,since I have a good sense of humor.
>
> The empty list is exactly what I wanted (refer to the early
> discussions of
> <i.0
>
> The question was, as everyone can read from my earlier post:
> Roger ! any enlightening comment ?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
