> Counsel of perfection, Roger. > Exactly what I wrote myself, in an IBM internal report in 1981.
Which makes it more puzzling why you don't read the documentation, and is quite proud of the fact. Talking about APL (or J) without use of "array", is like doing Hamlet without the prince. ----- Original Message ----- From: Ian Clark <[email protected]> Date: Tuesday, October 26, 2010 8:46 Subject: Re: [Jgeneral] "J In A Day" --crits please To: General forum <[email protected]> > Counsel of perfection, Roger. > > Exactly what I wrote myself, in an IBM internal report in 1981. > > Nowadays I take the world as I find it. > > > in which everything--noun, verb, adverb, conjunction, > > parenthesis, copula, ..., atom, table, ..., everything-- > > is an "array". > > -- that, as it happens, is most helpful. Thank you for that insight. > > But for the present purpose (JinaDay) it makes me even keener to avoid > the term "array". > > "When everybody's somebody -- then no one's anybody" > (Gilbert & Sullivan, 'The Gondoliers'). > > > > On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 4:28 PM, Roger Hui <[email protected]> wrote: > > You are putting the cart before the horse. > > The implementation has to follow the description, > > and you can not (should not) use the implementation > > to justify the description. > > > > FYI: in the J implementation there is a sense > > in which everything--noun, verb, adverb, conjunction, > > parenthesis, copula, ..., atom, table, ..., everything-- > > is an "array". But the fact would not be helpful > > to a general audience. > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: Don Guinn <[email protected]> > > Date: Tuesday, October 26, 2010 7:55 > > Subject: Re: [Jgeneral] "J In A Day" --crits please > > To: General forum <[email protected]> > > > >> 3!:3]99j1 > >> e1000000 > >> 10000000 > >> 01000000 > >> 00000000 > >> 00000000 > >> 00c05840 > >> 00000000 > >> 0000f03f > >> > >> J still treats a complex number as a zero rank array. > >> > >> 3!:3]99r2 > >> e1000000 > >> 80000000 > >> 01000000 > >> 00000000 > >> 18000000 > >> 30000000 > >> e1000000 > >> 04000000 > >> 01000000 > >> 01000000 > >> 01000000 > >> 63000000 > >> e1000000 > >> 04000000 > >> 01000000 > >> 01000000 > >> 01000000 > >> 02000000 > >> > >> Same for rationals. > >> > >> On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 8:50 AM, Raul Miller > >> <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > >> > On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 9:34 PM, Donna Y > >> <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > > An array can have one element but it is not a scalar number. > >> > > If it is an array it has not only magnitude but also direction. > >> > > > >> > > A scalar number by definition scales - it has magnitude - it > >> > > is not a vector or an array. It has rank 0. > >> > > >> > I did not follow all of what you wrote, but consider: > >> > > >> > scalar: 1j2 (has magnitude and direction, and is an array) > >> > array: i.0 1 2 3 4 (has no magnitudes and no directions, > >> but still is an > >> > array) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
