Thanks Henry!

>>    17 24 35 +"0 1 i. 5
I can see that from the second example you provide that it was daft trying
to change the rank of  i,  since it is actually   +   that needs this
treatment.
I.e. I could have made a verb   r0addr1 =:  +"0 1   and done  (17 24 35
r0addr1 i.5).  Cool.

>>    17 24 35 (+ i.)"0 (5)
The parsing of your first example still eludes me though.  I am assuming
that (+i.) is a hook, and that   "0  applies not to both its arguments, but
to the right one only.
That would be interpreted, hm, let's see,   x f (g y)    IOW  the
pseudo-expression   (17 24 35) + (( i."0) (5))
Of course the actual above expression doesn't work (length error) , but its
"sense" works, i.e. when written as a hook.
OK, I think I got that now...

Is there a better way to rewrite the exact operation of that hook?  One
that actually works, and makes the  x f g y   interpretation clear?
That is to say, am I getting anywhere here?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm

Reply via email to