J's trace facility should make the answer to this question obvious? Thanks,
-- Raul On Sat, Jul 19, 2014 at 8:49 PM, Linda Alvord <lindaalv...@verizon.net> wrote: > I'm still looking for the phrase or concept that explains the difference > between these two. Why are they producing different results? > > 3(***(***)(***))4 > 35831808 > > 3((***)(***)***)4 > 429981696 > > If you grew up in the early years using APL, an idea might come to mind. > > Linda > > -----Original Message----- > From: programming-boun...@forums.jsoftware.com > [mailto:programming-boun...@forums.jsoftware.com] On Behalf Of 'Pascal > Jasmin' via Programming > Sent: Saturday, July 19, 2014 8:34 PM > To: programm...@jsoftware.com > Subject: Re: [Jprogramming] High Speed Train Challenge > > > > 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 > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
