I'm also in favor of #: working as #.^:_1 .
I have no clue whether much would break, but I can imagine if anybody does
need it they can as well use {:@:#: . If this would be a problem
performance-wise, maybe the old logic could be applied in this case as
special code?
Just my 2 cents.
Best regards,
Jan-Pieter
On Wed, 4 Jul 2018, 14:45 Henry Rich, <[email protected]> wrote:
> I agree with you about the desirability of changing the definition but
> boy! what code it might break! We have to decide whether the change is
> worth the trouble.
>
> On second thought, maybe not so much would break. I know that dozens of
> times I have written (atom #: list) and gotten the result I didn't want,
> but I always fixed them by writing #.^:_1 . I don't remember any cases
> where I left (atom #: y) intending to get an atomic result. Has anyone?
>
> Henry Rich
>
> On 7/4/2018 1:37 AM, Joey K Tuttle wrote:
> > The proposed change is only to Antibase (#:) not Copy (#)
> >
> > Plus, all the functionality of #: would be maintained and the statement
> from NuVoc, "x #: y is used only when you need to state how many places
> you want in the result would still remain in effect but the left argument
> be required to be a vector (even if only 1 place was sought).
> >
> >
> >> On 2018Jul 3, at 21:41, Skip Cave <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>
> >> As long as we don''t change this functionality:
> >>
> >> 1 1 0 1 0 0 1#10 2 34 13 6 87 9
> >>
> >> 10 2 13 9
> >>
> >>
> >> Skip Cave
> >> Cave Consulting LLC
> >>
> >>
> >> On Tue, Jul 3, 2018 at 11:33 PM Jimmy Gauvin <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Hi,
> >>>
> >>> I also support the idea of this scalar extension.
> >>>
> >>> #.inv or #.^:_1 have a "kludgy" feeling ...
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Jimmy
> >>>
> >>> On Tue, Jul 3, 2018 at 11:31 PM, Joey K Tuttle <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Can anyone provide a reason it would be undesirable to have a scalar
> left
> >>>> (x) argument to #: behave any differently than x (#.^:_1) y ?
> >>>>
> >>>> In NuVoc I find - "
> >>>> x #: y is used only when you need to state how many places you want in
> >>> the
> >>>> result, or if x contains differing values. If you want just sufficient
> >>>> places to hold the value of y in the base x, use #.inv to convert to
> a
> >>>> fixed base.
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > 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
