Please test on a clean session. If the issue persists, please file a bug report with a simple test script, the result you expected and the current result together with the detail of you testing environment. Thanks.
Сб, 16 ноя 2013, Pascal Jasmin писал(а): > I'll just make this shorter. The only bug is in script files vs. interactive > mode. The key to (and only way of) noticing the bug is to use a conjunction > definition that accesses an external parameter affected by what the current > locale is (such as the 'a' parameter in following): > > conj_cat_=: 2 :'v@:u^:a' > > > If the above is defined in repl then it will correctly use a_cat_, and use a > late binding for a. > > If it is defined in a script file, then a will be whatever 'a' is in the > caller's locale. > > I of course agree with you in what the locale of verb vb should be, but that > is unrelated to this issue. I agree with the interactive mode's execution of > locales. But at any rate, either interactive or script mode necessarily has > a bug. > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Henry Rich <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Cc: > Sent: Saturday, November 16, 2013 11:02:10 PM > Subject: Re: [Jprogramming] bug in conjunction locales? > > The point, as Raul has pointed out, is that 'execution' of the > conjunction is not what you think it is. Raul said that conjunctions > are executed twice, which is not quite right: the conjunction is > executed once, to produce an anonymous verb, and then that verb is > executed, at which time the text of the conjunction is interpreted. > > Consider > > vb =: + c_loc_ - > > Assume c_loc_ is defined like > c_loc_ =: 2 : 0 > u@v y > ) > > What is vb? > > Answer: it is the result of executing c_loc_ . It is a verb, which > contains the +, -, and text of c_loc_, saved for interpretation when vb > is executed. The text of c_loc_ has not been executed. > > What is the locale of vb? > > Answer: whatever locale was in effect when it was defined. The loc > locale has nothing to do with vb. > > Why doesn't > vb 3 > execute in loc? > > Answer: Why should it? c_loc_ has been executed and is a distant > memory. vb contains the text that was in c_loc_, but it is not c_loc_, > and is not in the loc locale. > > What about > (+ c_loc_ -) 3 > ? What locale does it execute in? > > Answer: The locale that was in effect. Now there is no name vb, but > the idea is the same: the verb (+ c_loc_ -) is an /anonymous verb/ > and it is defined in the locale in effect. It executes in that locale. > > Given > vb_loc1_ =: + c_loc_ - > vb_z_ =: vb_loc1_ > vb 3 > what locale is in effect when the text of vb is executed? > > Answer: loc1. Again, c_loc_ is long gone, and executing vb_loc1_ > sets the locale to loc1. > > Isn't this a bug? > > Answer: No. To say otherwise would be to say that a derived verb > must inherit locale from its components. Then there is a whole new set > of problems: > vb =: (+ adv_loc1) @ (- adv_loc2) > What would be the locale of vb? > vb =: (+ adv_loc1) (- adv_loc2) (- adv_loc3) > What would be the locale of vb? > > The current definition is clear and crisp, and hasn't revealed any > insuperable problems. > > JfC discusses this in more detail. > > Henry Rich > > > On 11/16/2013 10:39 PM, Raul Miller wrote: > > The issue, I think, is that (except for verbs) names are resolved to > > their definitions before their definitions are used. > > > > require 'trace' > > trace 'verb_dog_ conj_cat_ %' > > --------------- 4 Conj ------- > > verb_dog_ > > 2 : 'u&.(v inv)' > > % > > verb_dog_&.(%^:_1) > > ============================== > > > > Notice how the verb is named and the conjunction is not. > > > > I remember there being an explanation for this but I do not remember > > if that was grounded in "efficiency concerns" or in dictionary. > > > > Thanks, > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm -- regards, ==================================================== GPG key 1024D/4434BAB3 2008-08-24 gpg --keyserver subkeys.pgp.net --recv-keys 4434BAB3 gpg --keyserver subkeys.pgp.net --armor --export 4434BAB3 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
