Here is a simple J version of ic which doesn't use @ or & ic =: [: , [: j./&i:/ +. h=: 13 :',([:(([:i:[)j./[:i:])/+.)y' ic [: , [: j./&i:/ +. h [: , [: (([: i: [) j./ [: i: ])/ +. (ic-:h)1j2 1
Linda -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of km Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2013 2:25 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [Jprogramming] Writing J 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
