Speaking of x and y, u and m... Is there a cheat sheet for them and the rules?
A rule being " you have referenced x and y without u or m. " Some places I've looked: 1. http://www.jsoftware.com/help/dictionary/dictc.htm (very light) 2. http://www.jsoftware.com/jwiki/Vocabulary/Modifiers 3. http://www.jsoftware.com/help/jforc/loopless_code_ii_adverbs__an.htm#_Toc191734359 4. http://www.jsoftware.com/help/learning/13.htm 5. http://www.jsoftware.com/jwiki/MarkusSchmidtGroettrup?action=AttachFile&do=view&target=j_schnell_referenz_20070616.pdf (page six) #2 and #4 are probably the best I've found so far I was working this morning and couldn't remember the rules so I started to write each permutation as 1 (2 : 'smoutput x;y') 2 1 (2 : 'smoutput u;v;y') 2 'a' 10 (2 : 'u v 2') + 10 (2 : 'u v y') + 3 ... On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 2:19 PM, Raul Miller <[email protected]> wrote: > Oh, duh -- copy and paste coding, and I stripped out the 'm'. > > I guess I'd like a default "braindead" mode for when I am recovering from > being ill (like today) or very tired. > > (This would issue domain errors at define time if x and y are being > promoted to u/v significance.) > > I'm not sure how hard that would be to implement, however. > > Thanks, > > -- > Raul > > > > On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 11:48 AM, 'Pascal Jasmin' via Programming < > [email protected]> wrote: > > > you have reference x and y without u or m. There is a global setting (6! > > or 9! something) to turn this off I think. I don't see why you are using > > an adverb here. > > > > on another note: > > > > bind > > 2 : 'x@(y"_)' > > > > is there any case where the definition 2 : 'u@(v"_)' would fail or > > produce a different result? > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: Raul Miller <[email protected]> > > To: Programming forum <[email protected]> > > Cc: > > Sent: Wednesday, October 8, 2014 11:29 AM > > Subject: Re: [Jprogramming] what is happening here? > > > > Worse... I work around this... whatever it is.. by changing the > definition: > > > > $ ijconsole > > appendbox=:1 : 0 > > y > > : > > pfx=. ,1 4{.y > > assert. pfx-:,_1 4{.y > > if. ' ' e. pfx do. '' return. end. > > prefix=. (2{.pfx),'/',pfx > > dir=: 'Reference/',prefix > > (;x,&.>LF) fileappend dir,'/data06.txt' > > ) > > 1 'a' appendbox 2 > > |value error: y > > | y > > 9!:14'' > > j701/2011-01-10/11:25 > > > > > > How can I be getting a value error on y? Why is the monadic definition > > being used in the dyadic case? How can I get anything done when things > are > > this crazy? > > > > Can anyone else reproduce this? > > > > Thanks, > > > > -- > > Raul > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 11:22 AM, Raul Miller <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > > I paste a definition into my J session: > > > > > > appendbox=:1 :0 > > > : > > > pfx=. ,1 4{.y > > > assert. pfx-:,_1 4{.y > > > if. ' ' e. pfx do. '' return. end. > > > prefix=. (2{.pfx),'/',pfx > > > dir=: 'Reference/',prefix > > > (;x,&.>LF) fileappend dir,'/data06.txt' > > > ) > > > > > > And then I inspect the name > > > > > > appendbox > > > 1 : 0 > > > pfx=. ,1 4{.y > > > assert. pfx-:,_1 4{.y > > > if. ' ' e. pfx do. '' return. end. > > > prefix=. (2{.pfx),'/',pfx > > > dir=: 'Reference/',prefix > > > (;x,&.>LF) fileappend dir,'/data06.txt' > > > ) > > > > > > Somehow my adverb has mutated. > > > > > > What is going on here? > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > -- > > > Raul > > > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > 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
