Thanks for alerting me to this possibility, Bob. Fortunately it seems, in the situation it's arising in, I can be confident the tacit code coming to my utility is fully-parenthesised. Or at least, appropriately parenthesised.
Viz (+:@:+)/ as opposed to: +:@:(+/) On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 5:00 PM, bob therriault <bobtherria...@mac.com> wrote: > HI Ian, > > If your v includes an adverb such as / the long left reach of conjunctions > could get you into trouble. That would be part of the parsing rules for verbs > vs conjunctions. > > (+:@:+/) 3 4 5 > 42 > ([:+:+/) 3 4 5 > 24 > > Cheers, bob > > On 2012-11-29, at 8:49 AM, Ian Clark wrote: > >> Department of Sudden Doubts... >> >> If u and v are verbs, do (u@:v) and ([: u v) really behave the same >> under all circumstances? >> >> If so, where would I go to find this fact written up? >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> 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
