? (32$2) , 32 $ 1000
1 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 1
0 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 1
The chance of getting that with no bug is about 1 in 10^86. There's a bug.
The question is, Why can't we just fix it? If I wanted to put in the
change, how would I do so and get the change into a release?
We have a bug list of 50 or so errors, some serious. If this language
is going to live, it needs to be able to grow.
Henry Rich
On 12/17/2015 9:08 PM, bill lam wrote:
I think there are already enough evidences to call for
further investigation to prove or disprove the bug.
Чт, 17 дек 2015, Raul Miller написал(а):
On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 12:40 PM, 'Pascal Jasmin' via Programming
<[email protected]> wrote:
?. 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16
0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 1
1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 8 9 6 8 14 7 12 9 1 15 2 15 3 13 3
?. 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16
0 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0
1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 1
one less leading 2 in first example. 47 leading 2s, correct result. 48
leading 2s and everything is 2.
So?
Consider this:
?.4#4
2 0 0 2
4{.?.400#4
2 0 2 0
The size of the right argument influences the values generated at each position.
You would need to perform a large number of experiments to show a
statistical flaw in the results.
--
Raul
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
