Or accept the dictionary's specification of rank as a part of its definition...

Thanks,

-- 
Raul

On Fri, Jun 15, 2018 at 10:35 PM Henry Rich <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> It's a theorem:
>
> [x] >@(f each) y
>
> [x] >@(f&.>) y
>
> [x] >@((<@:f)&>) y
>
> [x] (>@(<@:f)&> y
>
> [x] (>@:<)@:f&> y
>
> [x] f&> y
>
> [x] (f every) y
>
>
> Some of these steps are very much not obvious IMO.  And you have to get
> the rank of each right, that is, use the NuVoc definition of &. rather
> than the Dictionary one.
>
> Henry Rich
>
> On 6/15/2018 8:30 PM, Ian Clark wrote:
> > I've checked Chapter 1 off, but that's only to say I've checked out the
> > code and verified it gives the results claimed. I didn't see it as my job
> > to rewrite the treatment to make it clearer – which I can't do anyway
> > without being sure what the author is trying to convey.
> >
> > I must confess that first section completely baffles me. I cannot see how
> > to relate the "general rule" to actual examples of J code, although the
> > article goes on to do just that … it seems. Does the "rule" represent real
> > working J code? – even in a generic sense? Is it even true? (Theorems have
> > to be true, but rules only have to be obeyed.) If it isn't always true, am
> > I to understand it as a rule-of-thumb?And if it is in fact universally
> > true, what procedure must I, the novice reader, follow in order to convert
> > the "generics" into "specifics" to verify the fact?
> >
> > I'd be grateful for someone to cast light on the matter. Failing which,
> > maybe I ought to remove my green checkmark, stand aside to let someone else
> > scratch their head over it.
> >
> > On Sat, Jun 16, 2018 at 12:41 AM, David Lambert <[email protected]>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> 50 Shades of j chapter 1 now says that rule is completely general.  I'm
> >> somewhat weak on j transformations and proofs, although what was there was
> >> incorrect because of a counterexample:
> >>
> >>
> >>     every=.&>        NB. uses compose
> >>     each=.&.>        NB. uses under
> >>     rule =: (f every) -: >@(f each)
> >>
> >>     NB. Is completely general?
> >>
> >>
> >> thank you, Dave
> >>
> >> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
>
>
> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
> https://www.avg.com
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm

Reply via email to