http://jsoftware.com/stable.htm says no such thing.
-- Raul On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 9:20 PM, Henry Rich <[email protected]> wrote: > My understanding is that you're supposed to keep your J6 release current > by copying over the j.dll from J7. If that's wrong I hope somebody will > correct me. > > Henry Rich > > On 5/16/2011 8:54 PM, Raul Miller wrote: >> 2011/5/16 Roger Hui<[email protected]>: >>> I believe I have found and fixed the bug. >>> >>> The problem is in 2 f/\y , implemented by infix2 in file ap.c. >>> by the expression (}:y) f (}.y) . In certain cases, instead >>> of explicitly doing }:y and }.y, the code constructs >>> headers which point to the same data, thereby saving >>> time and space. The fix is to make the condition for the >>> "certain cases" more stringent, viz., when f is a primitive >>> atomic function. This more stringent condition still >>> covers 100.0% of the practically useful cases. >>> >>> Now if somebody demonstrates cases where 2 f/\y fails >>> even for f an atomic function (+ - *>. etc.), I would >>> dispense with the optimization, and just do (}:y) f (}.y). >> >>> From this description, I imagine ]"0 could be used to work around the >> problem for people using an older version of J? >> >> (Will this fix also go into a J6 release?) >> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
