For part 1, I implemented something like that explicitly. For part 2, I went with an argument of pos,skip,list (which might be more amenable to a tacit representation of part 1). But my gut feeling is that this one is messy enough that it's more comprehensible to stick with an explicit representation.
Using t like you are doing here prevents it from being an argument (which you'll want, I imagine, for your code to work on both the AoC test cases and the "real value" they supply). That said, if I went full tacit, I'd either be using the gerund form for } - or I'd work out how to do it without } in the mix. Not sure this helps... but you didn't really ask a specific question, so maybe this will be close enough. Thanks, -- Raul On Sun, Dec 10, 2017 at 2:02 PM, Jimmy Gauvin <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > > would anyone care to comment on the transformation of this piece of code to > tacit notation? > > v being the 256 element vector > c being the current position > t being the length of the part tot rotate > > NB. v=.c|.v > NB. v=.(|.t{.v),t}.v > NB. v=.(-c)|.v > > v=.( |.&(t&{.) , t&}. ) &. (c&|.) v > > Thanks > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
