Which gets back to me being baffled by the thinking that @. is not necessary because we can use a 532 character expression instead.
-- Raul On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 11:21 PM, Jose Mario Quintana <[email protected]> wrote: > Right, I did think it was that easy ;) > > As the subject of this thread clearly implies we, Dan and I, were talking > about tacit adverbs. "The use of illegal steroids is not appreciated in > this venue! :)" > > Incidentally, the size of linear representation of Adv has a lot to do with > the verbosity of linear representations of words involving atomic > representations. Why should one be so concerned about it? > > > > > On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 10:39 PM, Raul Miller <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Explicit is an alternative, also. >> >> -- >> Raul >> >> >> On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 7:12 PM, Jose Mario Quintana >> <[email protected]> wrote: >> > "There are always alternatives." I am really curious, can you produce >> any >> > arbitrary tacit adverb where neither @. nor `:6 appear in its code? >> > >> > >> > >> > On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 5:06 PM, Raul Miller <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> > >> >> I am probably being something horrible, but... I'm kind of baffled by >> >> the thinking that @. is not necessary because we can use a 532 >> >> character expression instead. >> >> >> >> I mean, ok, sure, technically almost nothing is actually "necessary" >> >> because there are always alternatives. But, taken to its logical >> >> limit, computers fall in the same bucket, along with chairs, cars, and >> >> a variety of other such things which begin with the letter 'c'. >> >> >> >> -- >> >> Raul >> >> >> >> >> >> On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 5:00 PM, Jose Mario Quintana >> >> <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> > I am glad to see you around here Dan. If you only show around here >> from >> >> > time to time, or not ever again, the patrons and instructors can >> learn a >> >> > lot from you as your first post shows. By the way, as long as there >> are >> >> > patrons and instructors, it is everybody's Jym. >> >> > >> >> > Regarding @. ,in the context of this Jym, I also avoid it and, as far >> >> as I >> >> > can see, it can always be avoided (even from an orthodox standpoint) >> >> > because Adv's definition [0] does not rely on it and, in principle at >> >> > least, any tacit adverb can be expressed as v Adv. I currently use >> it in >> >> > one tool, not because it is necessary, but because the context is >> ideal >> >> for >> >> > @. and therefore it is very efficient. >> >> > >> >> > [0] [Jprogramming] Tacit Toolkit (was dyadic J) >> >> > >> >> >> http://www.jsoftware.com/pipermail/programming/2015-December/043678.html >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 12:10 PM, Dan Bron <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Pepe wrote: >> >> >> > Instructors (Dan, Thomas et al. are you listening?), >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> I always listen when you speak, Sensei. Though in recently years my >> >> review >> >> >> of J Forum traffic has been more sporadic. >> >> >> >> >> >> > a1 =:(`{.)(`{:)(@.1 0 2) >> >> >> >> >> >> Hey, I never thought of doing a1 in that fashion. Neat approach. >> >> >> >> >> >> Personally, I keep @. in reserve, as my heavy artillery, for when my >> >> >> tactical mind, unsubtle as it is, is unavailable to find a way to >> route >> >> my >> >> >> infantry (primitive adverbs and bound primitive conjunctions) around >> a >> >> >> wall, and neither can my light cannon (`:6) pierce it. >> >> >> >> >> >> Anyway, to mix metaphors again, for those who are looking for some >> >> workout >> >> >> tips to train their tacit muscles (it is unwise to enter Pepe’s Jym >> >> >> unprepared), here’s a few I offered once, back when I could have >> been a >> >> >> contender: >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> http://www.jsoftware.com/pipermail/programming/2010-November/021172.html < >> >> >> >> >> >> http://www.jsoftware.com/pipermail/programming/2010-November/021172.html> >> >> >> >> >> >> -Dan >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> >> 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
