Oleg Kobchenko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> --- Terrence Brannon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >
> > But 3 $ 1 2 3
> > has zero magnitude in the 2nd dimension, no? So it would seem to be
> > equivalent 0 3 $ 1 2 3 but per the interpreter it is not.
>
> It's not zero magnitude in higher dimension, it's _empty_ magnitude.
> Same as scalar has empty dimention, but itself represents one
I like scalar myself but "atom" is the proper J terminology. I also like matrix
much more than array. But why sweat the small stuff? :) And list? well that
totally aggravates me. Vector is great. List is stepping on the toes of cons
cells that that particular data structure.
> data location. Shape 3 is not (0,3) it's ('',3).
I see. Now, in terms of data storage:
an array of shape 1,3 can store 1 vector of magnitude 3 which can store 3
"somethings".
an array of shape '', 3 can store 3 somethings (it is a vector of magnitude 3).
but what about an array of shape 0,3? How can you index into that vector of
magnitude 3 and get or store data?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
