More likely
(, #)/..~
The downside of dyadic u in key is that it would break existing code.
Including, of course: ({. , #)/.~
FYI,
--
Raul
On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 6:48 AM, Ric Sherlock <[email protected]> wrote:
> I agree it would be nice. If I understand correctly, the proposed
> definition would allow the following replacement:
> ( ({. , #)/.~ ) becomes ( (, #)/.~ )
>
>
> On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 4:15 PM, Raul Miller <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> I have often wished for that.
>>
>> --
>> Raul
>>
>> On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 8:43 PM, Roger Hui <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>> > I have a question concerning your use of *key*. Do you find yourself
>> > wishing that in x f/.y, the f would be invoked with a left argument which
>> > is key value corresponding to the items in the right argument? This does
>> > not mean that the J definition or implementation will be changed, but to
>> > find out that if I have an opportunity to define/implement key in another
>> > context ;-) whether I should consider changing it.
>> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>> > 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
