3 * utu utu 4
3 * 1 : '[: u~ u' 1 : '[: u~ u' 4 429981696 ----- Original Message ----- From: Kip Murray <thekipmur...@gmail.com> To: "programm...@jsoftware.com" <programm...@jsoftware.com> Cc: Sent: Saturday, July 19, 2014 6:55:02 PM Subject: Re: [Jprogramming] High Speed Train Challenge utu =: 1 : '[: u~ u' 3 *:@* utu 4 429981696 uses the ideas that *** is equivalent to *:@* and u u u is equivalent to [: u~ u On Saturday, July 19, 2014, 'Pascal Jasmin' via Programming < programm...@jsoftware.com> wrote: > I'm not sure I'm arguing for the idea. I've disliked ~ in the past > because I've read it as one of the other 2 meanings that was written. I > wonder if making reflexive more common would help overcome forgetting it > exists quicker. > > from your examples, it would appear that good candidates for monadic + and > * would be +~ and *~. Monadic * and + could have been chosen with +: and > *: symbols. We can (fortunately) implement such bivalence ourselves: > > area =: *~ > > area 8 > 6 area 8 > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: robert therriault <bobtherria...@mac.com <javascript:;>> > To: programm...@jsoftware.com <javascript:;> > Cc: > Sent: Saturday, July 19, 2014 6:16:58 PM > Subject: Re: [Jprogramming] High Speed Train Challenge > > Hi Pascal, > > Not arguing against the idea but they are only functionally the same for > monadic. > > 4 *: 4 > |domain error > | 4 *:4 > 4 +: 4 > |domain error > | 4 +:4 > 5 *: 4 > |domain error > | 5 *:4 > 5 *~ 4 > 20 > 5 +: 4 > |domain error > | 5 +:4 > 5 +~ 4 > 9 > > Cheers, bob > > > On Jul 19, 2014, at 2:59 PM, 'Pascal Jasmin' via Programming < > programm...@jsoftware.com <javascript:;>> wrote: > > > kindof the same as your idea > > > > *~(^:3) 12 > > 429981696 > > > > completely off topic, but would it be a good or bad thing if, assuming > there was a shortage of ascii mnemonics, and some need, if monadic +: and > *: were redefined considering that +~ and *~ do the same? > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: Erling Hellenäs <erl...@erlinghellenas.se <javascript:;>> > > To: programm...@jsoftware.com <javascript:;> > > Cc: > > Sent: Saturday, July 19, 2014 3:05:03 PM > > Subject: Re: [Jprogramming] High Speed Train Challenge > > > > Another way to do the same thing, but not a solution, is this expression: > > > > 3 (*(*(***)*)*) 4 NB. Funny way > > 429981696 > > > > Anyone can find a nice recursive way to write it? My best shot: > > > > 12 1:`([ * [ $: [: <: ])@.([: * ]) 8 NB. Complicated way > > 429981696 > > > > It's a recursion? * $: * > > > > /Erling > > > > > > > > > > On 2014-07-19 20:48, Raul Miller wrote: > >> Probably, yes. > >> > >> And I was sort of provocative by not going with the implied limitations. > >> > >> But there's can be quite a bit of ambiguity when key issues are > >> implied, rather than addressed or illustrated. > >> > >> This is a problem I face myself, quite often: How can I be aware of > >> important issues which matter to other people, when I am incredibly > >> focused on my own point of view? > >> > >> That said: > >> > >> (1) Erling Hellenäs had already posted some solutions which satisfied > >> the "one verb" constraint using * as that verb (at the time I made my > >> 42981696"_ post). > >> > >> (2) Realizing that derived verbs are J verbs is an important lesson > >> which beginning J programmers often overlook. > >> > >> You can't really be a good J progammer if you don't understand the > >> grammar of the language. And it's not that the grammar is hard to > >> understand - it's extremely simple. But it's so simple that it's also > >> easy to sometimes get by with false generalizations about its rules. > >> > >> This leads into the almost inevitable "no that's not what I meant" > >> sorts of social issues. > >> > >> So yes, my post was - in a sense - somewhat bratty. But I felt that > >> the underlying issue was important enough to raise the point and stick > >> with it at least until someone called me on it. > >> > >> 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 > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm > -- Sent from Gmail Mobile ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
