The case for linear boxed representation: linear representation is easier to manipulate than atomic. atomic provides a way to interpret the difference between strings and functions. linear boxed also provides this formalism, but with the ease of manipulation of linear. linear boxed structures representations are in a 2 column table. The type column is easily discarded to take the linear forms. A single "tie" modifier can attach any form of speech to the representation accumulator. (though that could be developed for atomic too) Its easier to process anonymously if you assume either a bias to functions or nouns (parse strings as assumed modifiers or assumed data). Anonymous processing is a key to functionality. The lack of complete tools for processing atomic representations is what motivated linear boxed rep, and the ease of making those tools.
----- Original Message ----- From: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Cc: Sent: Monday, March 9, 2015 11:17 PM Subject: Re: [Jprogramming] linear boxed representation : A new representation format for mixed type words Pascal Jasmin wrote: PJ> PJ> if you want to pass a gerund (or boxed noun) to a function, it must PJ> either be all verbs (with single adverbs as strings permitted), or all PJ> nouns. So this is possible. PJ> '`a b c' =. '/';+`- PJ> but it fails for an adverb phrase. PJ> '`a b c' =. '/\';+`- PJ> |spelling error You are missing out on the more general notion of Atomic Representations. Gerunds are arrays of verb ARs. ARs are uniquely defined for *any* syntactic class, though, and you are free to mix them: a =. + b =. - c =. /\ d =. 42 (ar =. 5!:1) ;:'a b c d' +-+-+---------+------+ |+|-|+-+-----+|+-+--+| | | ||5|+-+-+|||0|42|| | | || ||/|\|||+-+--+| | | || |+-+-+|| | | | |+-+-----+| | +-+-+---------+------+ '`aa bb cc dd' =. ar ;:'a b c d' aa + bb - cc / \ dd 42 nameclass ;:'aa bb cc dd' 3 3 1 0 (aa cc ,: bb cc) 1 2 3 1 3 6 1 _1 2 Further reading: http://jsoftware.com/help/dictionary/dx005.htm for 5!:1 (and, if you like, its reverse 5!:0); then re-read http://jsoftware.com/help/dictionary/d001.htm to re-check how the back-tick in '`a b c' is defined. Further further reading: Bernecky, Robert, and R.K.W. Hui, Gerunds and Representations, APL91, ACM. Martin PS: Apropos "reading": I cannot read your (or anybody else's) message parts with unicode box characters on the machine which receives the newsified forum messages. If you want me to be able to read those message parts, please adhere to the Forum rules as stated in <http://www.jsoftware.com/jwiki/System/Forums>: **Formats** The mailing lists send out emails in plain text format. For best results, please send messages to the forum in this format. When copying J session output to an email, first set box-drawing characters to Ascii. The IDEs have a menu item for this, e.g. in J8 Qt, select View|Toggle Ascii Box Drawing. Having said that, and *not* having been able to read your code, just guessing from your "Subject: I'm afraid you are re-inventing a wheel. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
