Terrence wrote: >I dont know that it can be done with the interpreter
We had this discussion: if the concept can't be expressed in the interpreter, it's wrong (ok, modulo bugs in the interpreter). The interpreter knows what J is. If you think you know something about J, and the interpreter argues with you, then it wins. This is why I recommend supplementing your reading with experimenting. > _0-cells do mean the entire datum unless I am wrong... No, as I indicated yesterday (A), there is no "_0" in J. Zero has no sign. Or, alternatively, positive zero and negative zero are the same thing. So f"_0 is the same as f"0 , which, as you know, operates on atoms, not the entire datum. I think your original confusion was created by a sentence in JfC about which Henry said (B): > The wording as I have it in the book does not quite work as > a programming spec. ... I'll change the wording. And was further corroborated by a bug in my Essay, which conflated the positive integers with the nonnegative integers. Tracy Harms pointed out this bug (C), and I have corrected the essay (D). -Dan (A) http://www.jsoftware.com/pipermail/general/2007-April/029668.html (B) http://www.jsoftware.com/pipermail/general/2007-April/029665.html (C) http://www.jsoftware.com/pipermail/general/2007-April/029676.html (D) http://www.jsoftware.com/jwiki/Essays/A_Fine_Line?action=diff&rev2=4&rev1=3 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
