Thanks for explanation.

A related question, how to do the inverse of ]: ie to get the linear 
representation of an anonymous functional?

10.03.2014, в 3:30, Jose Mario Quintana <[email protected]> 
написал(а):

> Yes, the verb ]: produces non-nouns and the reason for defining it as a
> verb is because it becomes much more powerful this way.  Why?  Fortunately
> for me Dan has already has explained masterfully why, in the context of
> cloaking agenda (@.) as a verb in
> http://www.jsoftware.com/pipermail/programming/2013-January/031249.html ;
> he was not aware at that time that a cloaked @. is a wicked verb but that
> only strengthens his arguments.  Here there is an example of this power,
> involving the verb ]:, for cloaking a few conjunctions and assigning them
> to multiple verbs (evoke, power, agenda and at) at once,
> 
>   ( 'evoke power agenda at'=. ]: @: < &.> @: ;: '`: ^: @. @:' )
> ┌───────────┬───────────┬───────────┬───────────┐
> │(]:(<'`:'))│(]:(<'^:'))│(]:(<'@.'))│(]:(<'@:'))│
> └───────────┴───────────┴───────────┴───────────┘
> 
> Moreover, I routinely cloak as verbs all the primitive adverbs and
> conjunctions using a script containing the pertinent sentences on page 33
> on the article in the Journal of J referred in the my initial post.
> 
> I doubt Lev and Dex will be resurrected as [. and ]. because they can be
> defined easily explicitly and now even tacitly (see,
> http://www.jsoftware.com/pipermail/programming/2014-March/035796.html ).
> Yet, that is beside the point, it would be safer to define Trigger and
> Trap as, for instance, [.. and ].. ; but, my understanding is that the
> implementation becomes more difficult.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Sun, Mar 9, 2014 at 12:31 PM, Raul Miller <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
>> These are good questions.
>> 
>> I like these questions.
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> 
>> --
>> Raul
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On Sun, Mar 9, 2014 at 12:22 PM, bill lam <[email protected]> wrote:
>> 
>>> Does the verb Cloak X ]: Y return a non-noun? If so, why ]: is
>>> not a conjunction?
>>> 
>>> tokens [. and ]. were previously Lev and Dex, will it be better
>>> to reserve them for the possible resurrection of Lev and Dex;
>>> and use other tokens for Trigger and Trap?
>>> 
>>> Pardon me if my questions are silly.
>>> 
>> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm

Reply via email to