On 10/5/07, Terrence Brannon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > 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.
Not really -- If J had cons cells (it doesn't, unless the programmer defines them), they would be rank 1, two element lists. Some other languages treat certain associations of cons cells as lists, but that doesn't remove the original meanings of the word "list", nor is it reasonable to impose the technical restrictions associated with the jargon of one language on the implementation or discussion of a completely different language. > but what about an array of shape 0,3? How can you index into that vector of > magnitude 3 and get or store data? Any array which has a zero as a component of its shape can only store zero elements of data. The number of atoms represented by an array is the product of the dimensions contained in the shape. And, 0 times anything is 0. -- Raul ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
