One thing I'd keep in mind is that errors do have utility. (Programmers use errors to help focus their attention on parts of the code that need attention.)
So when you change the language to eliminate an error case you need to make sure that you're adding something useful. That could easily be the case here, but I wanted to mention this. Thanks, -- Raul On Mon, Mar 17, 2014 at 12:30 PM, Thomas Costigliola <[email protected]>wrote: > The (a v) train was an idea from Viktor Cerovski that I believe was mainly > motivated by the desire for a tacit "dynamic rank". See > http://www.jsoftware.com/pipermail/programming/2010-November/021108.htmlfor > the discussion. > > Pascal is correct, the parsing rules can get "unintuitive" although the > rules were not changed it is simply a bident that gets swallowed up instead > of spit out: > > / + > / + > > / + + > (/ +) + > > / + + + > / (+ + +) > > / + + + + > (/ +) (+ + +) > > NB. Looks like a game of even and odds > > It works well for " ~ !. !: d. D: L: S: t. t: . The other contenders } ^: > @. already accept verbs or gerunds so I don't see much use for them. > > I believe in a majority (maybe others have different use cases) of the > dyadic applications the intention is to pass the adverb's noun argument as > either X or Y and not make it depend on both X and Y. So in > > X ((f c) v) Y > > where c is " S: L: etc., most of the time you have > > f =: f_verb @ ] > v=: v_verb @ [ > > If you actually want to call f_verb dyadically you still have to embed the > dynamic noun argument into X and/or Y and most of the time you don't want > that to be input to f_verb as well, so you end up just do something like > > f=: f_dyad / @ ] > > Now consider dynamic fit !. Fit must apply to f_verb or f_dyad and not f. > So it doesn't seem possible to me to use unless you can derive the fit from > one of the arguments to your underlying verb. But I haven't discovered a > practical use yet for something like > > 3 (({.!.) [) 0 > 0 3 3 > > My suggested "improvement" would be to change the dyadic definition to > > X (a v) Y => (v X) a Y > > That cleans up the monadic cases so that f in (f a) doesn't need to be > modified and also makes monadic application of fit work. For dyadic f you > will still need to do something like N (((f /) c) v) X,Y.And if you do want > v to be applied dyadically you can use the fork > > (v (a [) ]) > > Dyadic fit will still not work though.To fix that my (wacky!?) ideas are: > 0. Leave it and don't worry about fit or the extra convenience of X (a v) Y > => (v X) a Y on monadic applications > 1. Drop the train altogether and follow Pepe's suggestions > 2. Define something like X (a (f ` g ` h)) Y => (g Y) (f X) a (h Y), > 3. Let fit work on f @: g, f @ g etc. and push the fit into f > 4. Just change the implementations directly of " S: L: !. etc. to work the > way you want them to > 5. Invent triadic verbs by placing the third argument underneath the verb: > > X + Y > Z > > > > On Sun, Mar 9, 2014 at 5:58 PM, Jose Mario Quintana < > [email protected]> wrote: > > > By the way, we might drop or modify the (adverb verb) train in the near > > future; because, given the other extensions, its ability to refer to the > > noun arguments (x and y) is no longer crucial. Thomas has some thoughts > > about this. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sun, Mar 9, 2014 at 3:53 PM, Jose Mario Quintana < > > [email protected]> wrote: > > > > > If you have access to a Windows environment you can simply overwrite > the > > > j.dll (after making a backup, of course!) with the one provided at the > > page > > > referred in my first post; also, you can have a look at the Cheatsheet > > > provided in the same page. The Cheatsheet shows, among other items, > the > > > full parsing table including the extensions. Meanwhile, > > > > > > / @ / * > > > / @ /* > > > ┌───────┬─┐ > > > │┌─┬─┬─┐│*│ > > > ││/│@│/││ │ > > > │└─┴─┴─┘│ │ > > > └───────┴─┘ > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sun, Mar 9, 2014 at 8:50 AM, Pascal Jasmin <[email protected] > > >wrote: > > > > > >> I can answer that these all replace domain errors. I cannot try the > > >> patch yet. > > >> > > >> patches 3 and 4 may conflict with each other though probably not. > > >> > > >> (a c a v) could/should be an adverb train. ((a c a) v) -> c v (or? a > > (c > > >> (a v))) > > >> > > >> (a c a v v) might be ambiguous too. I find patch 3 more useful and > > >> intuitive than patch 4, and I assume that c v v still binds as (c v) > v, > > in > > >> which case it retains the above intuitiveness, but I could see > problems > > >> with (a v v v v v... v) > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> ----- Original Message ----- > > >> From: bill lam <[email protected]> > > >> To: [email protected] > > >> Cc: > > >> Sent: Sunday, March 9, 2014 12:06:18 AM > > >> Subject: Re: [Jprogramming] J Extensions > > >> > > >> Will it change current J semantics or break existing code? > > >> If it is compatible with current J701 engine, I'll try to add > > >> it into android libj.so which is also GPL licensed. > > >> > > >> Is there any test suite for the extensions? Actually I don't > > >> understand those extensions, sorry to be slow. > > >> > > >> Сб, 08 мар 2014, Jose Mario Quintana писал(а): > > >> > The patches, a Windows 32-bit DLL, a cheatsheet, 32 and 64 bit Unix > > >> > libraries are found at: > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > http://www.2bestsystems.com/foundation/j/ > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > For more details and demonstration code, see the article in the > > >> Journal of > > >> > J: http://journalofj.com/index.php/vol-2-no-2-october-2013 (only > the > > >> > definition of the new conjunction knot (`.) has been slightly > modified > > >> for > > >> > the release). > > >> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > >> > 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 > > >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > >> 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
