Wow! That suggests new insights. When is sc invoked? Do the two ranks apply to each verb?
> On Oct 14, 2019, at 5:35 PM, Louis de Forcrand <[email protected]> wrote: > > If this makes it any clearer, here is an implementation of /. key: > > key=: 1 : 0 > =@[ u@# ] > ) > > where = self-classify can itself be defined as > > sc=: ~. -:"_ _1"_1 _ ] > > Cheers, > Louis > >> On 14 Oct 2019, at 21:26, Raul Miller <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> I'm not sure what you mean, but consider: >> >> 'abcba' </. 'abcde' >> +--+--+-+ >> |ae|bd|c| >> +--+--+-+ >> >> Basically, any monadic verb that can handle lists of items from the >> right argument will work with /. (but keep in mind that if the results >> have differing lengths, the short results will be padded when >> assembling the result). >> >> Thanks, >> >> -- >> Raul >> >>> On Mon, Oct 14, 2019 at 3:18 PM 'Jim Russell' via Programming >>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> Yes, much. That seems not the case for a character array left argument, >>> thus my confusion. Thank you! >>> What other arguments/verbs play nice with /, ? >>> >>>>> On Oct 14, 2019, at 3:05 PM, Raul Miller <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>> Ok, try this: >>>> >>>> 1 2 3 2 1 </. 'abcde' >>>> +--+--+-+ >>>> |ae|bd|c| >>>> +--+--+-+ >>>> >>>> The nub of the left argument determines the number of items in the >>>> result, but it's not sufficient to determine what's in each box. >>>> >>>> Is this clearer? >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Raul >>>> >>>> >>>>> On Mon, Oct 14, 2019 at 1:24 PM 'Jim Russell' via Programming >>>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Sorry, I'm still stuck on u=#. (Or "," or "<" or "[" ). I'll try to >>>>> understand some harder working verbs, perhaps + or ! or I. or e? >>>>> >>>>>>> On Oct 14, 2019, at 12:18 PM, Raul Miller <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> On Mon, Oct 14, 2019 at 12:06 PM 'Jim Russell' via Programming >>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>> Thank you Raul! I thought I was agreeing, until I got to the following: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Oct 14, 2019, at 11:40 AM, Raul Miller <[email protected]> >>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> So ... it's the "only the nub" which is relevant here, if you do not >>>>>>>>> care about the calculation which produces the result. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> What calculation? What would be different if (I was allowed to) just >>>>>>>> supply (~.x) as a left argument? (Assuming I didn't care to waste the >>>>>>>> cycles calculating the nub when it, at least its size, is going fall >>>>>>>> out as a result of looking up each of the eight argument rows). >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> But I'll accept that I'm missing something; the alternate that Roger >>>>>>>> suggested looks like it should do exactly what I was looking for. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The X U/.Y calculation. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The order and values of X matter for that calculation, since they >>>>>>> control it. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> Raul >>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>> 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 > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
