I do not think that this is 64 bit representation issue:

   2^.15^22
85.9516
   15(cs&|@^)22 5 3 20 15 18
6 10 11 24 14 9
   cs|15(^)22 5 3 20 15 18
0 10 11 0 0 0

I think it's a special code issue. I think the (cs&|@^) expression
gets handled by special code.

Thanks,

-- 
Raul
On Sat, Jul 28, 2018 at 3:59 PM Brian Schott <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Chris, (et al),
>
> Referring to your recommendation regarding issue #1, I am having some
> difficulty.
> Norman claims that the reason the following computation results in 0's is
> that numbers like 15^22 are too big for the computer to represent. But
> 15^22 can be represented with a 64bit computer, at least in my J version,
> so the 0's do not produce the "signal" that the calculation needs
> adjustment.
>
>  cs=.29
>  15(cs&|@^)22 5 3 20 15 18
> 0 10 11 0 0 0
>
> However, the subsequent calculation adjustments that are then employed in
> the fsoj are all correct as far as I know, and the only thing that I think
> needs change is a statement that the revised version (which uses powers
> instead of multiplication) requires a few other changes which are all
> included in the remaining write up. Such a statement should replace the
> calculation above and the explanation of the 0's.
>
> Maybe there is some other calculation that can be done to signal that a
> problem exists, but I could not produce such a calculation.
>
> Help.
>
> On Sat, Jul 28, 2018 at 8:00 AM, chris burke <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > For 1), please use 2 large primes as suggested to fix this for J64. I think
> > any pair should do for this article.
> >
> > For 2) whether you use f"0 or f&> on a list of numbers is a matter of
> > taste, as also whether you include the "0 or &> in the definition or use it
> > when it is called. I would leave the style unchanged here, but after the
> > sentence "The & conjunction ..." it is worth pointing out that "0 could be
> > used to the same effect.
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Jul 27, 2018 at 3:56 PM, Brian Schott <[email protected]>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > I am now working on fsoj 39 about cyphers. There are 2 separate but
> > > slightly related issues I need help with.
> > >
> > > Issue #1)
> > >
> > > The following code in fsoj produces the result  shown.
> > >
> > >    cs=.29
> > > 15(cs&|@^)22 5 3 20 15 18
> > > 0 10 11 0 0 0
> > >
> > > But current (64bit) J produces the following result.
> > >
> > >    cs=.29
> > >    15(cs&|@^)22 5 3 20 15 18
> > > 6 10 11 24 14 9
> > >
> > > Norman uses the fsoj result to lead into a short description of the
> > problem
> > > which results and a fix for the problem which involves using the
> > following
> > > adjustments.
> > >
> > > Instead of using
> > >
> > >    enc=:cs&|@*
> > >
> > > Norman uses
> > >
> > >    mul=.cs&|@*
> > >    eenc=.mul/@#
> > >    5 eenc &> 22 5 3 20 15 18
> > > 13 22 11 24 10 15
> > >
> > > The issue is that current J does not need the revision, but the rest of
> > the
> > > fsoj is based on the such a need. I suspect a good alternative would be
> > to
> > > use a well studied product of 2 large primes in place of the cs=.29 to
> > show
> > > the problem exists and then use those 2 large primes in place of the 2
> > > Norman uses later in the fsoj article ( 3551=53*67) .
> > >
> > > Comments on how to handle this question are sought here. If a pair of
> > large
> > > primes are part of the suggestion, are there well studied or well
> > > publicized examples?
> > >
> > > Issue #2)
> > > A smaller detail related to Norman using every (&>) in his development of
> > > the solution to the problem above when applying the verb eenc. He
> > justifies
> > > this choice on eenc NOT being a scalar verb. But if eenc is simply
> > defined
> > > with rank 0 as
> > >
> > >
> > > eenc=:mul/@#"0
> > >
> > >
> > > then every is unnecessary.
> > >
> > >
> > > My question is, should the rank 0 version be used instead?
> > >
> > > --
> > > (B=) <-----my sig
> > > Brian Schott
> > > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
> > >
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
> >
>
>
>
> --
> (B=) <-----my sig
> Brian Schott
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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