That is, in    ic1=: , @ (j./&i:/) @ +.   the dyad of the derived verb
j./&i: is being applied.

Composition in CMN (conventional mathematical notation) typically deals
with monadic functions, denoted f∘g.  Composition of dyadic functions is
one of the contributions of APL/J.


On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 11:56 AM, Roger Hui <[email protected]>wrote:

> Using @ instead of & would give a different (and wrong) answer.
>
>
> On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 11:47 AM, Ric Sherlock <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> I'm interested in the choice of & rather than @ in ic1.
>> Are there stylistic reasons for preferring the previous definition to the
>> following:
>>    ic1=: , @ (j./@i:/) @ +.
>>
>> My understanding is that for monadic use u&v and u@v are equivalent.
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Feb 8, 2013 at 8:31 AM, Roger Hui <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > I would write it:
>> >
>> > ic1=: , @ (j./&i:/) @ +.
>> >
>> > I feel that it's very hard to win (hard to be clearer) if you replace a
>> > primitive conjunction by something else.  In this case & .
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 11:25 AM, km <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >
>> > > Here is an example.  Verb ics below is in Simplistic J, verb ic is
>> not.
>> > >
>> > >    ic =: [: , [: j./&i:/ +.  NB. has modifier chain
>> > >
>> > >    ics =: [: , [: (i:@[ j./ i:@])/ +.  NB. no modifier chain
>> > >
>> > >    (ic -: ics) 1j2
>> > > 1
>> > >    ic 1j2  NB. Produce a "complex symmetric interval"
>> > > _1j_2 _1j_1 _1 _1j1 _1j2 0j_2 0j_1 0 0j1 0j2 1j_2 1j_1 1 1j1 1j2
>> > >
>> > > Kip Murray
>> > >
>> > > Sent from my iPad
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > On Feb 7, 2013, at 9:54 AM, Raul Miller <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>> > >
>> > > > That name might be less controversial if it were changed to
>> "Simplistic
>> > > J".
>> > > >
>> > > > That said, personally I find this definition too ambiguous to reason
>> > > > about.  Reading a file, for example, requires the use of a
>> conjunction
>> > > > that you have disallowed.  But it looks to me like you have allowed
>> > > > conjunctions that you have disallowed.  So this implies, to me, that
>> > > > your concept of "use" and mine are different.
>> > > >
>> > > > Then again, you have said that you "often" write in this style, so
>> > > > maybe I should view this not as a constraint on code but something
>> > > > closer to a statistical observation.  Personally, I often use nouns
>> > > > and verbs (for example), and I do indeed write sentences that do not
>> > > > contain anything other than nouns and verbs.
>> > > >
>> > > > It might be worth building a "cost scheme" for evaluating the
>> > > > complexity of a J sentence.
>> > > >
>> > > > For example:
>> > > >
>> > > > sentenceCost=:verb define
>> > > >   +/1 0 1 8 16 2{~2+nc;:y
>> > > > )
>> > > >   sentenceCost '+/1 0 1 8 16 2{~2+nc;:y'
>> > > > 11
>> > > >
>> > > > A more elaborate version might enumerate individual dictionary
>> tokens
>> > > > instead of using 1 for all of them.  Another variation might require
>> > > > test data and explore properties of the resulting evaluation (for
>> > > > example: is the result a noun, if so what rank is it?)
>> > > >
>> > > > --
>> > > > Raul
>> > > >
>> > > > On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 9:49 PM, km <[email protected]> wrote:
>> > > >> I often write in Simple J, defined to be J with no conjunction
>> other
>> > > than  "  Rank.  Adverbs, including  &.>  &>  @[  and  @]  , are
>> > permitted.
>> > >  When I need conjunctions  :  @.  ^:  .  ;.  I leave Simple J.
>> > > >>
>> > > >> Simple J rules out modifier chains with their left-to-right
>> > > association, "long left reach" and "short right reach", and relies on
>> > forks
>> > > and hooks plus  "  Rank for composition.  I like to have rank for
>> > > composition out in the open when it is not infinite.
>> > > >>
>> > > >> Simple J including its name is controversial!
>> > > >>
>> > > >> Kip Murray
>> > > >>
>> > > >> Sent from my iPad
>> > > >>
>> > > >>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>> > > >> 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

Reply via email to