Raul,Yes. That is TOO clever (see why, below).Your approach provides a way to avoid using gerund form of } .Making the <"1 part of a verb (and especially the "1 part of <"1) instead of including it in the construction of the verb's righthand argument noun, brings your conjunction's y into the amend in steps, rather than all at once. But you really defied my intuition by replacing the m in the usual m} with the y for the conjunction definition. No wonder I could not make any sense of your hint; it was too clever.Thanks,---(B=)
> On Feb 19, 2019, at 10:51 AM, Raul Miller <[email protected]> wrote: > > Mine wasn't a solution, more of a hint. I got the rank wrong. > > That said, the issue you mentioned would break code in just about any > language: my quotes had gotten changed to something else. > > Anyways, here's a solution: > > (w 2 :'m y}n'i)@<"1(#:i.4){;/+/~0 1 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
