you mean ([: v [: u a ]) is not the same as ([: v@:u a ]) but if u incorporates a , like in ([: v [: (u a) ]) , then it should be the same as ([: v@:(u a) ]), IIRC.
R.E. Boss > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:programming- > [email protected]] On Behalf Of 'Pascal Jasmin' via > Programming > Sent: donderdag 12 februari 2015 15:13 > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [Jprogramming] Source of frustration > > > > ([: v [: u ]) is almost but not exactly the same as > > ([: v@:u ]) > > basically, if u has any adverbs applied to it (such as "1) then those adverbs > also apply to v in v@:u. But don't apply to v in ([: v u) > > A good reason for 13 : to have given you what you got is that you explicitly > used @ instead of made just a linear phrase. > > > > > ________________________________ > From: Linda Alvord <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Sent: Thursday, February 12, 2015 3:09 AM > Subject: Re: [Jprogramming] Source of frustration > > > There have been many explanations of y=how @ works, but here is the > question > I really am interested in. > > Working code: > (i.4)*/>:i.5 > 1 2 3 4 5 > 2 4 6 8 10 > 3 6 9 12 15 > 4 8 12 16 20 > Simple working definition: > times=: 13 :'(>:i.x)*/>:i.y' > 4 times 5 > 1 2 3 4 5 > 2 4 6 8 10 > 3 6 9 12 15 > 4 8 12 16 20 > Definition which also works but seems cumbersome: > times2=: 13 :'(>:@i.x)*/>:@i.y' > 4 times 5 > 1 2 3 4 5 > 2 4 6 8 10 > 3 6 9 12 15 > 4 8 12 16 20 > Why couldn't my definition of times be converted to what seems to be the > preferred J version in times2? > times > ([: >: [: i. [) */ [: >: [: i. ] > > times2 > ([: >:@i. [) */ [: >:@i. ] > > Linda > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Linda > Alvord > Sent: Monday, February 9, 2015 5:01 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [Jprogramming] Source of frustration > > Here's another example of my suggestion: > > > > These two expressions have the same result. > > > > eb=: 13 :'y $<'' ''' > > ([:<eb)"1(>:i.2),"0/>:i.4 > > ----T-----T-------T---------┐ > │--┐│--T-┐│--T-T-┐│--T-T-T-┐│ > ││ │││ │ │││ │ │ │││ │ │ │ ││ > │L--│L-+--│L-+-+--│L-+-+-+--│ > +---+-----+-------+---------+ > │--┐│--T-┐│--T-T-┐│--T-T-T-┐│ > ││ │││ │ │││ │ │ │││ │ │ │ ││ > │+-+│+-+-+│+-+-+-+│+-+-+-+-+│ > ││ │││ │ │││ │ │ │││ │ │ │ ││ > │L--│L-+--│L-+-+--│L-+-+-+--│ > L---+-----+-------+---------- > > ([:<eb)"1(>:i.2),"0/>:i.4 > > ----T-----T-------T---------┐ > │--┐│--T-┐│--T-T-┐│--T-T-T-┐│ > ││ │││ │ │││ │ │ │││ │ │ │ ││ > │L--│L-+--│L-+-+--│L-+-+-+--│ > +---+-----+-------+---------+ > │--┐│--T-┐│--T-T-┐│--T-T-T-┐│ > ││ │││ │ │││ │ │ │││ │ │ │ ││ > │+-+│+-+-+│+-+-+-+│+-+-+-+-+│ > ││ │││ │ │││ │ │ │││ │ │ │ ││ > │L--│L-+--│L-+-+--│L-+-+-+--│ L---+-----+-------+---------- > > > > Define each one as I and j > > > > > > i=: 13 :'(<@eb)"1(>:@i.x),"0/>:@i.y' > > j=: 13 :'([:<eb)"1(>:i.x),"0/>:i.y' > > > > Both agree as monads and dyads. > > > > (i 2)-:j 2 > > 1 > > (2 i 4)-:2 j 4 > > 1 > > In the interpretation of J, [: is inserted when appropriate. > > > > My question is: "why couldn't both have the same > > Definition when trains are involved. It @ is superior, I would suggest the > definition of i > > for both. > > > > eb > > (<' ') $~ ] > > > > i > > [: <@eb"1 ([: >:@i. [) ,"0/ [: >:@i. ] > > > > j > > [: ([: < eb)"1 ([: >: [: i. [) ,"0/ [: >: [: i. ] > > > > Linda > > > > eb > > (<' ') $~ ] > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Kip > Murray > Sent: Monday, February 9, 2015 11:00 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [Jprogramming] Source of frustration > > > > And this: > > > > hh =: 3 : '[: >: i. y' > > hh > > 3 : '[: >: i. y' > > hh 4 > > |domain error: hh > > | [:>:i.y > > > > I think Brian's suggestion that you parenthesize the result of 13 : before > applying arguments is the best way of removing your frustration. My point > about parenthsizing [: > i. before applying arguments is specific to verbs > defined by trains. > > > > --Kip > > > > > > On Monday, February 9, 2015, Linda Alvord < > <mailto:[email protected]> > [email protected]> wrote: > > > > > How about this: > > > h=: 13 :'[:>:i.y' > > > h > > > [: [: [: >: i. > > > > > > [: [: [: >: i. 4 > > > |domain error: scriptd > > > | [:[: [:>:i.4 > > > > > > Linda > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: <mailto:[email protected]> > [email protected] <javascript:;> > > > [ > > <mailto:programming- > [email protected]%20%3cjavascript:;%3e> > mailto:[email protected] <javascript:;>] On > > > Behalf Of Brian Schott > > > Sent: Monday, February 9, 2015 10:00 AM > > > To: Programming forum > > > Subject: Re: [Jprogramming] Source of frustration > > > > > > Linda, > > > > > > If you are willing to put parentheses around your example verbs -- > > > with the data outside the parens, you will not get the domain error. > > > > > > On Mon, Feb 9, 2015 at 9:54 AM, Linda Alvord <[email protected] > > > <javascript:;>> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Suppose: ff=: 13 :'>:i.y' > > > > ff > > > > >:@i. > > > > Then: > > > > >:@i.4 > > > > 1 2 3 4 > > > > Which is what you want, more than a domain error. > > > > > > > > Linda > > > > > > > > -- > > > (B=) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > For information about J forums see > > <http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm> > http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > For information about J forums see > > <http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm> > http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm > > > > > > > > > -- > > Sent from Gmail Mobile > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > For information about J forums see > <http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm> > 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 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
