Checking out dissect finally motivated me to download and install J8.  I
tried:

   dissect'((3x&*) &1 &1) 0 1 2'

I checked all the show preferences and I got an interactive display...

I write tacitly as I normally speak in the sense that I do not consciously
follow grammatical rules.  Dissect is showing and explaining to me what I
did.  I am not kidding!


On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 7:19 PM, Henry Rich <[email protected]> wrote:

> If you're going to use dissect, get 3.6.42 (released today).  Previous
> versions had a confusing title for the verbs.
>
> Even with the picture it's amazing what this little phrase does.  Two
> nested powers, with the result of one power feeding back into the exponent
> of the next iteration of the same verb.
>
> Henry Rich
>
>
> On 2/18/2015 7:12 PM, Jose Mario Quintana wrote:
>
>>     ((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)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>  200352993040684646497907235156025575044782547556975141926501
>>>>>> 6973710
>>>>>> 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
>>
>>  ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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