I wrote: " I do not think the dictionary is wrong but perhaps it is incomplete. As you pointed out, the tally is 1 and the neutral element intance provision does not apply; so, for example, in the sentence (*/0) or in general (u/A) where A is an atom the result is the atom (A) (even if u is undefined!). Where is this documented? " and " 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. " and " Incidentally, as Thomas proposed, if it cannot insert the verb, then issuing an error could not have been a valid alternative as well? "
Henry wrote: " Crying about the Dictionary isn't going to get things documented. Yeah, it's documented in NuVoc. " Perhaps I should have written “Where is this officially documented?” My question was not about what the (official) interpreter does in this kind of circumstances (I have known that for a while), but whether or not it is doing what it should be doing according to the Dictionary. To clarify: my questions were (are) not rhetorical. On Thu, 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
