Pascal (and Joe),
I had noticed your witchcraft comment before and was impressed then.
Today I noticed in another thread for day 5 of advent... where Joe
referenced the byte code interpreter, the witch crafted definition of the
verb func. I don't think I noticed before the leftmost verb left ([) in
that line, perhaps because I focused on the fact the focus verb had only
one ')' for two separate applications of definition (:). That is really
creative and may be the reason only one ')' is required.
doc=.[(y,'_doc')=: 0 : 0
Btw, I tried to test out my theory of the need for the [ by redefining
func without the [, but I was unable to exercise this new version of func
because I could not understand how. What verb initializes all the calls
like func '...'?
On Fri, Nov 13, 2015 at 3:51 PM, 'Pascal Jasmin' via Programming <
programm...@jsoftware.com> wrote:
> This is some awesome witchcraft,
>
>
> func=: 3 : 0
> doc=.[(y,'_doc')=: 0 : 0
> lines=.LF cut doc
> 0!:0 > {: lines
> examples=.[(y,'_examples')=:3 }. each (#~ (<'ex:') E. 3 {. each [) lines
> assert each ". each examples
> ''
> )
>
> This is the witchcraft line
>
> doc=.[(y,'_doc')=: 0 : 0
>
> it reuses the function's own closing )
>
>
--
(B=)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
