Even NuVuc refers back to the DoJ as the authoritative, normative reference.
If pointing out gaps in the Dictionary on the Forums isn't the way to get it updated, what is? Please excuse typos; sent from a phone. > On Sep 11, 2014, at 4:45 PM, Henry Rich <henryhr...@nc.rr.com> wrote: > > Crying about the Dictionary isn't going to get things documented. Yeah, it's > documented in NuVoc. > > Henry Rich > >> On 9/11/2014 3:13 PM, Jose Mario Quintana wrote: >> My only guess is: >> "m/y inserts successive verbs from the gerund m between items of y" >> >> So, if there is no "between items of y" inserts nothing and y remains >> unchanged; but, it seems to me that the Dictionary could be more assertive >> in this instance. >> >> >>> On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 2:13 PM, Dan Bron <j...@bron.us> wrote: >>> >>> Pepe wrote: >>>> My only question is: Does the Dictionary support this behavior? >>> >>>> Raul responded: >>>> Yes, it does. >>> >>> I replied: >>>> I am intrigued. Can you elaborate? >>> >>> Thomas followed-up: >>>> I assumed that by not mentioning it, the implementation >>>> is free to do what it chooses. It could be anything! >>> >>> That's what I think too. The behavior is, in the strictest literal sense, >>> undefined. But Raul differs. I'm interested in his rationale (which, >>> historically, has been both solid and instructive). >>> >>> -Dan >>> >>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> 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
