Raul,
Your trick using echo is neat.
But, more than that, your further development which I have named go(t),
in contrast to the desired version which I have named wa(nt),
is very clever.
It turns out that a reshape of go produces an identical result to the
desired result,
as demonstrated below. But mostly a guess produced the reshape, and I
cannot generalize upon it. Does it give you any ideas?
tesl =: ;._3
link =: ;
cntrl =: 1 1,:2 2
filters =: 10+i.3 2 2 2
image =: 3 3 3$'abcdefghi','ABCDEFGHI',|.'abcdefghi'
wa =: (4 : 'cntrl x&(link"2) tesl y')"3 2
go =: 2 1 0 3&|:@(;"2/ cntrl&(];._3))"3 2
filters((0 2 1 3 4&|:@:go)-: wa)image NB. here's the proof
1
And, yes, your results do help a lot.
Thanks,
On Tue, May 21, 2019 at 6:49 AM Raul Miller <rauldmil...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Yes... in other words, the tacit expression you want can be hinted at this
> way:
>
> $(cntrl filters&(link"2) tesl ])"3 2 image
> 3 2 2 3 2 2
> $filters (cntrl [&(link"2) tesl ])"3 2 image
> 3 2 2 4
>
> But of course neither work right. The first fails because filters is
> the wrong value. The second fails because the grammar is wrong.
>
> To help see that filters is the wrong value for your tacit expression,
> you can replace the body of your explicit expression:
>
> filters(4 : 'echo x;y')"3 2 image
>
> To help see that the grammar is wrong in the second expression, you
> can replace the non-noun names with their values:
>
> $filters (cntrl [&(;"2);._3 ])"3 2 image
>
> That said, it occurs to me that this gets close:
>
> $filters 2 1 0 3&|:@(;"2/ cntrl&(];._3))"3 2 image
> 3 2 2 2 2
>
> That's still not right, though:
>
> want=: filters(4 : 'cntrl x&(link"2) tesl y')"3 2 image
> {:want=filters 2 1 0 3&|:@(;"2/ cntrl&(];._3))"3 2 image
>
>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
