The dawn finally broke. It's a deal!
3 10 4 ? 10 10 10
8 2 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
4 1 0 9 3 7 6 8 5 2
9 0 1 8 0 0 0 0 0 0
3 10 4 ?/ 10 10 10
6 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
2 6 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8 4 9 5 6 1 3 0 2 7
9 3 5 8 0 6 4 7 1 2
1 6 8 0 4 2 5 3 9 7
1 9 5 7 0 0 0 0 0 0
3 9 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 3 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
So:
8 8 8 8 8 ? 8 8 8 8 8
0 1 7 6 5 3 4 2
0 7 3 2 5 1 4 6
5 0 7 6 4 1 3 2
6 1 5 7 3 0 2 4
4 7 3 5 6 0 2 1
There is only one zero in each row.
It is nice when the fog lifts. Thanks to everyone who helped me.
f=:0 = # ? #
5 f 8
0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0
0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0
5!:4 <'f'
-- 0
+- =
--+ -- #
L---+- ?
L- #
Quite a pretty picture.
Linda
-----Origineal Message-----
From: programming-boun...@forums.jsoftware.com
[mailto:programming-boune...@forums.jsoftware.com] On Behalf Of Peter B.
Kessler
Sent: Thursday, November 08, 2012 9:24 PM
To: programm...@jsoftware.comn
Subject: Re: [Jprogramming] Arc consistency in J
The shape of the arguments to the verb that's being inserted is 3x4, so when
that verb returns an atom, as dyadic + does, the shape of the result is 3x4.
But dyadic ? (Deal[1]) doesn't return an atom: it returns a list of the
number of items of its left argument. So for each of the 3x4 applications
of dyadic ? returns a list of 3 elements, so the shape of the result is
3x4x3. There's probably a more official way to say that, but that's my
model of J, so far.
It might be slightly less confusing to use arguments that aren't also the
shapes of those arguments. E.g.,
The left argument is a list of length 2, and the right argument is a list of
length 4, so there are 2x4 pairs between each of which is inserted a Deal.
Each Deal chooses 3 items from i. 6 without replacement.
3 3 ?/ 6 6 6 6
5 0 2
3 5 0
1 4 5
1 0 3
0 3 2
0 5 2
1 2 4
3 0 1
so the shape of the result is 2x4x3.
$ 3 3 ?/ 6 6 6 6
2 4 3
Does that seem less odd?
... peter
[1] http://www.jsoftware.com/help/dictionary/d640.htm
Linda Alvord wrote:
> f=: 13 :'0=?~ x#y'
> f
> 0 = [: ?~ #
>
> Maybe someday I'll just write expressions like yours easily..... The
idea
> seems so simple now.
>
> However, I discovered this oddity:
>
> 3 3 3 +/ 4 4 4 4
> 7 7 7 7
> 7 7 7 7
> 7 7 7 7
>
> 3 3 3 ?/ 4 4 4 4
> 3 2 1
> 1 3 0
> 2 3 1
> 3 2 1
>
> 2 3 1
> 2 1 3
> 1 3 0
> 1 0 2
>
> 2 0 3
> 0 3 1
> 0 1 3
> 2 3 1
>
> This seems odd:
>
> Linda
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: programming-boun...@forums.jsoftware.com
> [mailto:programming-boun...@forums.jsoftware.com] On Behalf Of Bo
> Jacoby
> Sent: Thursday, November 08, 2012 4:46 AM
> sTo: programm...@jsoftware.com
> Subject: Re: [Jprogramming] Arc consistency in J
>
> Linda, stick to integer arithmetic:
> 5 (0=[:?~#) 8
> 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0
> 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0
> 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0
> 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0
> - Bo
>
>
>
>
>> ________________________________
>> Fra: Linda Alvord <lindaalv...@verizon.net>
>> Til: programm...@jsoftware.com
>> Sendt: 10:10 torsdag den 8. november 2012
>> Emne: Re: [Jprogramming] Arc consistency in J
>>
>> ee=:(]%2) > ?~@$
>> ee
>> 0.5 > ?~@$
>> ff=: 13 :'0.5 > ?~x$y'
>> ff
>> 0.5 > [: ?~ $
>> 5 ff 8
>> 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0
>> 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
>> 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0
>> 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0
>> 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0
>>
>> J is so smart, it eliminate the need for *
>>
>> hh=: 13 :' ?~x$y'
>> hh
>> [: ?~ $
>> ]A=:5 hh 8
>> 4 7 1 6 0 5 3 2
>> 4 2 3 1 5 7 0 6
>> 7 3 5 4 1 2 6 0
>> 5 3 2 4 1 7 6 0
>> 2 5 4 0 3 6 7 1
>> 0.5 > A
>> 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0
>> 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0
>> 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
>> 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
>> 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0
>>
>> Mind boggling!
>>
>> Linda
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: programming-boun...@forums.jsoftware.com
>> [mailto:programming-boun...@forums.jsoftware.com] On Behalf Of Devon
>> McCormick
>> Sent: Wednesday, November 07, 2012 12:56 PM
>> To: J-programming forum
>> Subject: Re: [Jprogramming] Arc consistency in J
>>
>> At first glance, I thought the right tine of this fork
>> (2 %~ ]) > [: (? ]) $
>> could be replaced by an idiom I frequently use
>> (?@$)
>> but then realized that what we need is
>> (?~@$)
>> so "dd" can be written as
>> (]%2) > ?~@$
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 1:31 AM, Michal D.
> <michal.dobrog...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>> Thanks Roger, that makes sense now. The history of J is one of it`s
>>> intriguing aspects for sure.
>>>
>>> Re: Linda: I would call it a v(erb) as opposed to a N(oun). But
>>> what do I know? ;-)
>>>
>>> Mike
>>>
>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 8:53 AM, Roger Hui
>>> <rogerhui.can...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> 'noun verb verb' is a fork and is interpreted as 'noun"_ verb verb'
>>> (noun"_
>>>> is a constant verb whose result is noun).
>>>> http://keiapl.org/anec/#nvv
>>>>
>>>> 'verb verb noun' can not be made into a fork because 'verb noun'
>>>> already has an interpretation (*viz*., apply verb to noun).
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 8:47 AM, Michal D.
>>>> <michal.dobrog...@gmail.com
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> Change from a Noun to a verb, view its tacit version and apply it
>>>>>> to
>>>>> data:
>>>>>> dd=: 13 :'(y%2) > (?]) x$y'
>>>>>>
>>>>>> dd
>>>>>> (2 %~ ]) > [: (? ]) $
>>>>>>
>>>>> That is quite cool. I'm surprised that you can automatically get
>>>>> the
>>>> tacit
>>>>> definition. Does this work for any explicitly defined verb?
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm also surprised at the way %~ came out. Do left hand arguments
>>>>> not require a & to bind the argument? It is strange to me that
>>>>> (1) works
>>> but
>>>>> (2) does not. It seems to me that (3) is the logical way to
>>>>> phrase
>>>> either
>>>>> of them (ie. a fork with a constant right / left side). To
>>>>> reiterate,
>>>> why
>>>>> does (1) work?
>>>>>
>>>>> (1) (2 %~ ]) > [: (? ]) $
>>>>> (2) (] % 2) > [: (? ]) $
>>>>> (3a) (2: %~ ]) > [: (? ]) $
>>>>> (3b) (] %~ 2:) > [: (? ]) $
>>>>> (4a) (%&2 ]) > [: (? ]) $ NB. incorrect (hook caught me
>>>>> out
>>>> again)!
>>>>> (4b) ([: %&2 ]) > [: (? ]) $ NB. correct
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>
>>>>> Mike
>>>>> -----------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> -
>>>>> ---- For information about J forums see
>>>>> http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
>>>>>
>>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> -
>>>> -- For information about J forums see
>>>> http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
>>>>
>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> -
>>> - For information about J forums see
>>> http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Devon McCormick, CFA
>> ^me^ at acm.
>> org is my
>> preferred e-mail
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> - For information about J forums see
>> http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> - For information about J forums see
>> http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
>>
>>
>>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
