I agree with you: If they ever make J multi-threaded to run rankly stuff in parallel, ?. will stop working.
Bob On Tue, 2007-09-11 at 18:34 -0400, Dan Bron wrote: > Raul observed: > > > ?.]3#100 > > 46 55 79 > > ?."0]3#100 > > 46 46 46 > > > Roger, what is the rationale for not changing the advertised rank of ?. in > the dictionary (and b. )? Why not just give the > ranks of ?. as _ _ _ ? (I can understand why you wouldn't want to > change the implementation to conform to the Dictionary's > spec of 0 0 0 ). > > -Dan > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
