My reading is that (N A) is not a train because it is executed when it
is encountered and produces a single word as its value. (A A) or (N C)
are not fully executed until something else comes along.
I find wrangling over what the Dictionary means unproductive.
Henry Rich
On 12/7/2018 6:30 PM, Jose Mario Quintana wrote:
Right, but this form is not mentioned in,
F. Trains
file:///G:/program%20files/j/addons/docs/help/dictionary/dictf.htm
Is it? (My apologies, I have not seen NuVoc in detail.)
I should mention that in that my Y combinator was, by design, producing
anonymous recursive verbs as (n a) trains.
On Fri, Dec 7, 2018 at 6:22 PM Henry Rich <henryhr...@gmail.com> wrote:
(Noun Adverb) is certainly allowed, as in m} .
Henry Rich
On 12/7/2018 6:20 PM, Jose Mario Quintana wrote:
As far as I can see the verb,
(<(<,':'),<(<(,'0');1),<(,'0');1 0$'u') (1 : 'u u`:6`:6 y')
is, or resembles, a train of the form (noun adverb) but this kind of
train
is not documented. Is it?
(The verbs produced by my version of the Y combinator were
On Fri, Dec 7, 2018 at 11:12 AM Henry Rich <henryhr...@gmail.com> wrote:
It turns out, though, that the bug exists only for certain adverbs on
the right. So there are some details involved.
Henry Rich
On 12/7/2018 11:09 AM, Raul Miller wrote:
That can't be right - in that case the parenthesis are redundant.
It's only when non-redundant parentheses are not reproduced that we
have a bug in linear representation.
That said, if I am understanding this thread, the top-level
parenthesis around any sub-expression to the left of an unknown adverb
or conjunction (or to the left of any parenthesized expression which
contains an unknown adverb or conjunction) when building a linear
representation must be considered non-redundant because you don't know
what grammar the expression will be used in.
This, in turn, suggests that those parenthesis are not the
responsibility of the code representing the sub-expression itself
(because they are not redundant there), but in the code which
assembles that representation into the larger expression.
I haven't looked at the implementation though - so it's possible that
actually implementing this concept would require a major restructuring
or rewrite of some sort.
Thanks,
---
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
----------------------------------------------------------------------
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
