This is a similar question: Where is the + in (2+3)&* ?
(9!:3) 5 4 1 NB. Linear, tree and atomic representations
(2+3)&*
(2+3)&*
5&*
┌─ 5
── & ─┴─ *
┌─────────────┐
│┌─┬─────────┐│
││&│┌─────┬─┐││
││ ││┌─┬─┐│*│││
││ │││0│5││ │││
││ ││└─┴─┘│ │││
││ │└─────┴─┘││
│└─┴─────────┘│
└─────────────┘
Plus does not appear because 2+3 is resolved as 5 which is apparent in the
atomic representation. Likewise, ,:`] in the verb expression
,:`]@.(<:@#@$) is resolved as a gerund,
,:`]@.(<:@#@$)
,:`]@.(<:@#@$)
┌─ ,:
┌─────┴─ ]
│ ┌─ <:
── @. ─┤ ┌─ @ ─┴─ #
└─ @ ─┴─ $
┌────────────────────────────────────┐
│┌──┬───────────────────────────────┐│
││@.│┌──────────┬──────────────────┐││
││ ││┌─┬──────┐│┌─┬──────────────┐│││
││ │││0│┌──┬─┐│││@│┌──────────┬─┐││││
││ │││ ││,:│]││││ ││┌─┬──────┐│$│││││
││ │││ │└──┴─┘│││ │││@│┌──┬─┐││ │││││
││ ││└─┴──────┘││ │││ ││<:│#│││ │││││
││ ││ ││ │││ │└──┴─┘││ │││││
││ ││ ││ ││└─┴──────┘│ │││││
││ ││ ││ │└──────────┴─┘││││
││ ││ │└─┴──────────────┘│││
││ │└──────────┴──────────────────┘││
│└──┴───────────────────────────────┘│
└────────────────────────────────────┘
There are other conjunction expressions that are also resolved, for
example, d. in
(*: d. 1) @: %:
+:@:%:
┌─ +:
── @: ─┴─ %:
┌────────────┐
│┌──┬───────┐│
││@:│┌──┬──┐││
││ ││+:│%:│││
││ │└──┴──┘││
│└──┴───────┘│
└────────────┘
or, if you prefer, in
[: (*: d. 1) %:
[: +: %:
┌─ [:
──┼─ +:
└─ %:
┌──────────────┐
│┌─┬──────────┐│
││3│┌──┬──┬──┐││
││ ││[:│+:│%:│││
││ │└──┴──┴──┘││
│└─┴──────────┘│
└──────────────┘
However, d. does not appear in the above linear representations but ` does
appear in the linear representation of ,:`]@.(<:@#@$). How come?
Apparently the linear representation facility is smart in that sense,
G=. ;:',: ]'
G @.
,:`]@.
┌─ ,:
┌────┴─ ]
──┴─ @.
┌───────────────────┐
│┌─┬───────────────┐│
││4│┌──────────┬──┐││
││ ││┌─┬──────┐│@.│││
││ │││0│┌──┬─┐││ │││
││ │││ ││,:│]│││ │││
││ │││ │└──┴─┘││ │││
││ ││└─┴──────┘│ │││
││ │└──────────┴──┘││
│└─┴───────────────┘│
└───────────────────┘
What I have never been able to figure out, completely, is the criteria used
for resolving some conjunctions (and adverbs) but not resolving other ones.
On Sun, Oct 4, 2015 at 12:16 AM, Linda A Alvord <[email protected]>
wrote:
> Two thoughts about this thread:
>
> Where is the tie in the tree?
> A little shorter mat.
>
> bill=:,:`]@.(<:@#@$)
> bill 'ab'
> ab
> 5!:5 <'bill'
> ,:`]@.(<:@#@$)
> 5!:4 <'bill'
> ┌─ ,:
> ┌─────┴─ ]
> │ ┌─ <:
> ── @. ─┤ ┌─ @ ─┴─ #
> └─ @ ─┴─ $
>
> mat
> (_2 {. 1 1 , $) $ ]
> mat2
> ] $~ _2 {. 1 1 , $
>
>
> Linda
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected] [mailto:
> [email protected]] On Behalf Of 'Pascal Jasmin'
> via Programming
> Sent: Saturday, October 3, 2015 12:29 PM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [Jprogramming] problem using ,:`]@.
>
> g^:f as if in J is one of the cooler patterns of the language.
> if. 1 = f(y) do. g(y) else. y end.
> From: Nollaig MacKenzie <[email protected]>
> To: [email protected]
> Sent: Saturday, October 3, 2015 1:06 AM
> Subject: Re: [Jprogramming] problem using ,:`]@.
>
> fie is my preference, I think - I wouldn't have thought of getting a no-op
> by doing an op 0 times :-)
>
> fum looked perverse at first, but quickly became intriguing. It would have
> other uses:
>
> fum (2 3$'abcdef'),:2 3$'UVWXYZ'
>
>
>
>
>
> On 2015.10.02 21:48:39, you,
> the extraordinary Raul Miller, spake thus:
>
> > It sounds like you are asking for this:
> >
> > fie=: ,:^:(2>#@$)
> >
> > but you might want to consider alternatives such as:
> >
> > foe=: , $~ _2{.1,$
> >
> > or
> >
> > fum=: ,.&.|:
> >
> > Good luck,
> >
> > --
> > Raul
>
> --
> Nollaig MacKenzie
> http://www.yorku.ca/nollaig
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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
