There seems to be a need for J sentences within tacit programming
anyway. For example, the primitives "@" and "@." seem to be saying: "I want
to follow one verb with another. Since I'm in tacit programming, they will
be treated as a fork. I want you to treat these two verbs as though they
were in a J sentence instead." So, in a sense, we are already trying to get
out of tacit programming. Why not do it properly and have a lot more
freedom,
capability and understandability?
For the moment, I should stick to ASCII. It is less confusing in this
discussion. Since there are no brackets left, I am going to have to use "F."
as a left bracket and "F:" as a right bracket.
"F:" says: "The script to my left is a J sentence. Pass the result so far as
the right argument of that J sentence."
"F." says: "The script to my left is tacit programming. Pass the result so
far as the right argument of that tacit programming."
The Standard Deviation verb is now:
SD =. F. %:(%N) * +/ *: F: ( ] - (+/ % F. N =. F: #))
Obviously it would look a lot better if the "{" and "}" could be
recovered as brackets and used instead of "F." and "F:".
SD =. { %:(%N) * +/ *: } ( ] - (+/ % { N =. } #))
This I can understand.
Don
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
