I think you meant (balancing the parentheses),
*: ((+&)/(@({. , {:))) 3 4 5 6
45
which is a clever solution for the particular form u@{. + u@{: . The
question is: Can you extend your refactoring approach to deal with other
more complicated forms (for example, u@:(u@:{. + u@:{:) , etc. )? The
$: trick can deal with the latter form easily, but mind you, for instance,
the form u^:_1@: (u@:{. + u@:{:) would introduce further complications.
On Wed, Apr 13, 2016 at 9:15 PM, 'Pascal Jasmin' via Programming <
[email protected]> wrote:
> I think I'm cheating because I'm not using $:
>
> what I meant by refactoring 1 : 'u@{. + u@{:'
>
>
>
> *: ((+&)/(@({. , {:)) 3 4 5 6
> 45
>
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Jose Mario Quintana <[email protected]>
> To: Programming forum <[email protected]>
> Sent: Wednesday, April 13, 2016 7:33 PM
> Subject: Re: [Jprogramming] Adverbial Tacit Jym
>
> Pascal, you are right about the example. Allow me to be more specific by
> labeling the cases:
>
> Exercise 1.1.0
>
> - 1.1.0.0 Provide an example of the method when there are multiple
> instances of u
>
> - 1.1.0.1 Provide an example of the method when u is monadic and the
> product (u a) is dyadic
>
> - 1.1.0.2 Provide an example of the method when u is monadic and the
> product is also monadic
>
> - 1.1.0.3 Provide an example of the method when u is dyadic and the
> product is dyadic
>
> The generic form u@{. + u@{: corresponds to the case 1.1.0.2 when there
> are two instances of u. The challenge is to exhibit an adverb, say,
> a1x1x0x2 such that, for example,
>
> *: a1x1x0x2 3 4 5 6
> 45
>
> by means of the method (i.e., using the same kind of trick).
>
>
> A m i n o r h i n t f o l l o w s . . .
> A m i n o r h i n t f o l l o w s . .
> A m i n o r h i n t f o l l o w s .
> A m i n o r h i n t f o l l o w s
> A m i n o r h i n t f o l l o w
> A m i n o r h i n t f o l l o
> A m i n o r h i n t f o l l
> A m i n o r h i n t f o l
> A m i n o r h i n t f o
> A m i n o r h i n t f
> A m i n o r h i n t
> A m i n o r h i n t
> A m i n o r h i n
> A m i n o r h i
> A m i n o r h
> A m i n o r
> A m i n o r
> A m i n o
> A m i n
> A m i
> A m
> A
> A
>
>
> #(5!:5)<'a1x1x0x1' NB. The tally of the lr of one solution...
> 28
>
> Incidentally, when u is a large verb and there are multiple instances of
> it, this kind of solutions produce thrifty verbs. The caveat, because
> their reliance on $:, is that cannot be embedded in within a fixed tacit
> verb... Unless, they are wearing a suit of armor!
>
>
> On Tue, Apr 12, 2016 at 2:32 PM, 'Pascal Jasmin' via Programming <
> [email protected]> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > > Provide an example of the method when there are multiple instances of u
> >
> > Not sure how here, except where 1 : 'u@{. + u@{:' could be refactored
> > into a single u, and then use $:
> >
> > Very interested in understanding other 3 examples.
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Jose Mario Quintana <[email protected]>
> > To: Programming forum <[email protected]>
> > Sent: Tuesday, April 12, 2016 10:17 AM
> > Subject: Re: [Jprogramming] Adverbial Tacit Jym
> >
> > Anyone that wants to know the answer can find the original one [0]
> written
> > almost 10 years ago!
> >
> > Sorry Dan, here there are more minor hints ;)
> >
> > The importance of this solution is that illustrates a fairly general and
> > straightforward method for writing of a very common form: u a where u is
> a
> > verb and its product (u a) is also a verb.
> >
> > This a bonus exercise:
> >
> > Exercise 1.1.0
> >
> > - Provide an example of the method when there are multiple instances of
> u
> >
> > - Provide an example of the method when u is monadic and the product (u
> > a) is dyadic
> >
> > - Provide an example of the method when u is monadic and the product is
> > also monadic
> >
> > - Provide an example of the method when u is dyadic and the product is
> > dyadic
> >
> >
> >
> > [0] [Jprogramming] Tacit adverb definitions?
> > http://www.jsoftware.com/pipermail/programming/2006-July/002627.html
> >
> > On Tue, Apr 12, 2016 at 8:50 AM, Dan Bron <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > > Pascal wrote:
> > > > for clarity, the answer is,
> > >
> > > No hints, please! Anyone who wants to know the answer can just scroll
> > down
> > > in Raul’s original message.
> > >
> > > -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
