Roger wrote: > I don't believe the messages you cited explained it. J syntax consists of > word formation as defined by ;: and parsing rules as defined by Section IIE > of the dictionary. How is amend-in-place not permitted by either part?
Sorry for being unclear. I was saying Erling Hellanas once expressed a thought similar to "J does not permit amendment in-place", and I responded to that by saying (in my typical longwinded way) "Nothing about J prohibits in-place amendment (and here's why...)". I think the specific word "syntax" is a red herring; it should be ignored as a distraction. The larger question to answer is "Does anything about J prohibit or proscribe in-place amendment". My take is "no" (and given that J *actually does* in-place amendment, I feel rather confident in that position), and the post I referenced below was an attempt at explaining the rationale (partially by speculating on why someone might believe in-place amendment was verboten). -Dan ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
