As far as I know these definition conjunction (:) forms were never
implemented in any public version of the interpreter (however, abut (`:0),
generalized insert (`:3), or simply (/), and train (`:6) do work). It
would be an interesting and useful exercise to write most, if not all those
adverbs (particularly in a fixed tacit fashion), together with a
conjunction, or an adverb, that collects them.
For example, the adverb dynamic compose (:57) can be written wickedly as
follows,
NB. Dynamic Compose (:57)...
o=. @:
( Cloak=. (<(<,'4'),<(<(<,'4'),<;:'0:`'),<(<,'4'),<;:',^:') (0:`)(,^:) )
,^:(0:`((0:`)(,^:)))
amper=. Cloak <'&'
train=. (evoke=. Cloak <'`:')&6
Compose=. (amper~&:train)/ o |.
Compose v0`v1`v2`v3
v0&v1&v2&v3
This wicked verb, as any other verb, can in turn be masked as an adverb,
C=. <(<,'4'),<(<,'"'),<(,'0');_[ O=. <'@:'
DN=. <(<,'4'),<(<,'`'),<(<,'0'),<<(,'0');_ [ VG=.
<(<,'4'),<(<'`:'),<(,'0');6
( Adv=. (`(C,O,DN,VG)) (@.(1;0 2;3;4)) )
(`("_`@:`(`_)`(`:6)))(@.(1;0 2;3;4))
u Adv
((("_)(u@:))(`_))(`:6)
1 2 3 % Adv
1 0.5 0.333333
( DynamicCompose=. Compose f.Adv )
((("_)(,^:(0:`&)~&:(,^:(0:``:)&6)/@:|.@:))(`_))(`:6)
v0`v1`v2`v3 DynamicCompose
v0&v1&v2&v3
Personally though, I prefer dynamic appose,
NB. Dynamic Appose...
appose=. Cloak <'&:'
Appose=. (appose~&:train)/ o |.
v0`v1`v2`v3 (DynamicAppose=. Appose f.Adv)
v0&:v1&:v2&:v3
On Sat, Nov 23, 2013 at 5:12 PM, Y-01 <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi@all
>
> I just read an article Gerunds and Representations [Robert Bernecky and
> Roger Hui, 17 july 2007] (www.snakeisland.com/gerunds.ps) and stopped on
> searching bijection on J7 (or J6 or J8).
>
> Ok, lets go to the most interesting place ... page 6
>
> Fibonacci numbers
>
> cb =. ] , +/ @( _2&{. )@]
> fib =. >&1 ` (i.@>:) ` cb ` <: `:4
> fib 7
>
> 0 1 1 2 3 5 8 13
>
> 1. How can we write this in J7 (without $:-solution).?
> NB. without
> NB. fib =: 1:`1:`( (+/@:(_2&{.))@:($:"0 (<:@<: , <:) ) )@. (2&<.) "0
> NB. fib i.10
> NB. 1 1 2 3 5 8 13 21 34 55
>
> http://www.jsoftware.com/help/dictionary/d612.htm say that there are only:
>
> m `: 0 *Append*
> m `: 3 *Insert*
> m `: 6 *Train*
>
>
> 2. Does J looses `: 4 (recursive compute in such view) `:5 (case) `:1
> (until) in it's evolution?
> (replacement with @.)
>
> 3. Maybe there is an article or page about J-gerunds-evolution and it's
> nearest future?
>
> thnks
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
