((2x&*) &1) 3
8
   ((2x&*)^:3) 1
8
   ((3x&*) &1) 2
9
   ((3x&*)^:2) 1
9


Does dissect

http://www.jsoftware.com/jwiki/action/show/Vocabulary/Dissect?action=show&redirect=Addons%2Fdebug%2Fdissect

help to follow the execution of the sentences?





On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 4:14 PM, 'Pascal Jasmin' via Programming <
[email protected]> wrote:

> I don't follow this completely either.  Though I am pretty sure the answer
> is rooted in applying a bonded verb dyadically.
>
> see right and bottom of:
>
> http://www.jsoftware.com/help/dictionary/d630n.htm
>
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Fausto Saporito <[email protected]>
> To: programming <[email protected]>
> Cc:
> Sent: Wednesday, February 18, 2015 1:00 PM
> Subject: Re: [Jprogramming] Fwd: Hello all!
>
> Hello,
>
> just a clarification about the "up" verb defined above.
> I know "&" is a conjuction bond, used for example in expressions like
> "10^&"... but I don't understand the "&1" format ...
>
> Please could you explain this ?
>
> thanks
> Fausto
>
>
>
> 2015-02-18 18:29 GMT+01:00 Fausto Saporito <[email protected]>:
> > yes... there's also another definition (recursive) called hyperoperation.
> >
> > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyperoperation
> >
> >
> >
> > 2015-02-18 18:20 GMT+01:00 R.E. Boss <[email protected]>:
> >> Link?
> >>
> >> Notice that Conway (who else?) in The Book of Numbers wrote a
> generalization
> >> of Knuth's up-notation (actually the Ackermann notation), his chained
> arrow
> >> notation.
> >>
> >>
> >> R.E. Boss
> >>
> >>
> >>> -----Original Message-----
> >>> From: [email protected] [mailto:programming-
> >>> [email protected]] On Behalf Of John Baker
> >>> Sent: woensdag 18 februari 2015 16:15
> >>> To: [email protected]
> >>> Subject: Re: [Jprogramming] Fwd: Hello all!
> >>>
> >>> Very slick. I was just reading Scott Aronson's fine blog post about the
> >> Busy
> >>> Beaver problem and he commented on Knuth's up up notation. If anyone's
> >>> interested in very large numbers Aronson's post is a superb overview.
> >>>
> >>> Sent from my iPhone
> >>>
> >>> > On Feb 17, 2015, at 3:05 PM, Jose Mario Quintana
> >>> <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>> >
> >>> > This a way to produce numbers using the Knuth up arrow notation in J:
> >>> >
> >>> >   Knuth=. &* NB. (adv)
> >>> >   up=. &1    NB. (adv)
> >>> >
> >>> >   2x  Knuth up up    4 5
> >>> > 65536
> >>> >
> >>> 2003529930406846464979072351560255750447825475569751419265016973710
> >>> 8940595563114530895061308809333481010382343429072631818229493821188
> >>> 1266886950636476154702916504187191635158796634721944293092798208430
> >>> 9104855990570159318959639524863372367203002916969...
> >>> >
> >>> >   # @: ": 2x Knuth up up 5
> >>> > 19729
> >>> >
> >>> >   6x Knuth up up 3
> >>> >
> >>> 2659119772153226779682489404387918594905342200269924300660432789497
> >>> 0735598738829091213422929061755830324406828265067234256016357755902
> >>> 7938964261261109302039893034777446061389442537960087466214788422902
> >>> 2133853819192905427915750759274952935109319020362271989...
> >>> >   #@: ": 6x Knuth up up 3
> >>> > 36306
> >>> >
> >>> >   3x Knuth up up up 0 1 2
> >>> > 1 3 7625597484987
> >>> >
> >>> > 2x Knuth up up 6  NB. It is toooooooooooo big!
> >>> >
> >>> > On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 2:23 PM, Fausto Saporito
> >>> <[email protected]>
> >>> > wrote:
> >>> >
> >>> >> Hello,
> >>> >>
> >>> >> yes the number is very big, but why if I don't use the extended
> >>> >> precision I have "infinity" as result, and if I use it I got an
> error
> >>> >> ?
> >>> >>
> >>> >> I should get infinity anyways.
> >>> >>
> >>> >> this is my J session:
> >>> >>
> >>> >> ^/ 2 2 2 2
> >>> >>
> >>> >> 65536
> >>> >>
> >>> >> ^/ 2 2 2 2 2      NB. do not use extended precision and I have
> "+inf"
> >>> >>
> >>> >> _
> >>> >>
> >>> >> ^/ 2 2 2 2 2 2   NB. do not use extended precision and I have "+inf"
> >>> >>
> >>> >> _
> >>> >>
> >>> >> ^/ x: 2 2 2 2 2   NB. using extended precision I have the result
> (part
> >> of
> >>> >> it)
> >>> >>
> >>> >>
> >>> >>
> >>> 2003529930406846464979072351560255750447825475569751419265016973710
> >>> 8940595563114530895061308809333481010382343429072631818229493821188
> >>> 1266886950636476154702916504187191635158796634721944293092798208430
> >>> 9104855990570159318959639524863372367203002916969592156...
> >>> >>
> >>> >> ^/ x: 2 2 2 2 2 2 NB. using extended precision I have error... not
> >> "+inf"
> >>> >>
> >>> >> |limit error
> >>> >>
> >>> >> | ^/x:2 2 2 2 2 2
> >>> >>
> >>> >> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knuth%27s_up-arrow_notation
> >>> >>
> >>> >> thanks,
> >>> >> Fausto
> >>> >>
> >>> >> 2015-02-17 18:55 GMT+01:00 'Pascal Jasmin' via Programming
> >>> >> <[email protected]>:
> >>> >>>  2 ^. ^/ 5 # 2x
> >>> >>> 65536
> >>> >>>
> >>> >>> so at just 5, it is a 65k bit number
> >>> >>>
> >>> >>> at 6, the 2log of that number would be that 65kbit number.  The
> number
> >>> >> of atoms in the universe is an 80 bit number.
> >>> >>>
> >>> >>>
> >>> >>>
> >>> >>>
> >>> >>>
> >>> >>> ----- Original Message -----
> >>> >>> From: Raul Miller <[email protected]>
> >>> >>> To: Programming forum <[email protected]>
> >>> >>> Cc:
> >>> >>> Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2015 12:32 PM
> >>> >>> Subject: Re: [Jprogramming] Fwd: Hello all!
> >>> >>>
> >>> >>> I would guess that the number you are generating is too big to be
> >>> >>> represented using J's data structures (which would also suggest
> that
> >>> >>> it would be too big to fit into memory).
> >>> >>>
> >>> >>> Thanks,
> >>> >>>
> >>> >>> --
> >>> >>> Raul
> >>> >>>
> >>> >>> On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 12:12 PM, Fausto Saporito
> >>> >>> <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>> >>>> HI!
> >>> >>>>
> >>> >>>> I'm a new J user with a little experience of APL and LISP.
> >>> >>>>
> >>> >>>> In these days I'm playing with big numbers... very big indeed,
> and I
> >>> >>>> found a bug (?) in the exteded precision implementation of J.
> >>> >>>>
> >>> >>>> I'm not sure if I can call it a bug, but if I use the standard
> >>> >>>> precision number I got a "infinity" as result... as should be.
> >>> >>>>
> >>> >>>> I'm talking about knuth-up-arrow notation, to build the "tower of
> >>> >>>> power". In J the syntax is amazingly simple : ^/ 2 2 2 2
> >>> >>>>
> >>> >>>> 2^^4 is 2 * (2* (2* 2)) = 65536
> >>> >>>>
> >>> >>>> Now 2^^5 is _ with standard precision... but if I use x:  (i.e.
> ^/ x:
> >>> >>>> 2 2 2 2 2) can get most of number... it's quite big indeed.
> >>> >>>>
> >>> >>>> The problem arises with 2^^6 or 3^^4 I get "limit error" instead
> of _
> >>> >> ... why ?
> >>> >>>>
> >>> >>>> Is it an expected behaviour ?
> >>> >>>>
> >>> >>>> thanks in advance,
> >>> >>>> Fausto
> >>> >>>>
> >> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>> >>>> 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
> >>> >
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>> > 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
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm

Reply via email to