"By all means break the rules, and break them beautifully, deliberately and well."
Bringhurst, Robert (2005). The Elements of Typographic Style PS. I try to keep that in mind when writing (particularly in J). On Thu, Nov 21, 2019 at 4:26 AM R.E. Boss <r.e.b...@outlook.com> wrote: > AMEN. > > When you try to uphold the rules of a language (which is done only by > older people), you are fighting a lost battle. > > > R.E. Boss > > > > -----Oorspronkelijk bericht----- > > Van: Programming <programming-boun...@forums.jsoftware.com> > > Namens Henry Rich > > Verzonden: donderdag 21 november 2019 04:02 > > Aan: programm...@jsoftware.com > > Onderwerp: Re: [Jprogramming] Explicit vs tacit with assignment > > > > Think nothing of it. I was back in the highschool today, talking linear > algebra > > to the very top layer of the high-performing students, having them write > > proofs on the board. It is obvious that the distinction between "its" > and "it's" > > is not observed in practice, even among these kids who are tomorrow's > > elite. It will be gone in another 100 years. > > > > Back when I was teaching Latin, I tried to give examples of the > difference > > between transitive and intransitive verbs in English. I started, > > > > We say "I lay the book on the table: I lay it, I laid it yesterday, I > have laid it > > there many times." > > > > We say "I lie down for a nap. I lie down, I lay down yesterday, I have > lain > > down..." > > > > the rest of the sentence was drowned out by cries of "No!". They had > never > > heard such a thing. My conclusion: "lie" is dead. Write it off. > > > > I have already written off "whom". The language evolves. > > > > Henry Rich > > > > On 11/20/2019 9:52 PM, Louis de Forcrand wrote: > > > Just to correct a mistake that I always hate making: > > > > > > "... for use after _its_ application ..." > > > > > > Sorry for the noise, > > > Louis > > > > > >> On 21 Nov 2019, at 03:49, Louis de Forcrand <ol...@bluewin.ch> wrote: > > >> > > >> (a,a=.?@#) is a verb, namely (?@# , ?@#). In this expression a is set > to the > > _verb_ ?@# and then train (a,a) is evaluated. > > >> > > >> In the second case a is set to the _result_ of ?@# and then (a,a) is > > evaluated. To do this tacitly: > > >> > > >> (] , ]) @ (?@#) > > >> > > >> or more concisely > > >> > > >> ,~@?@# > > >> > > >> or equivalently (how I would write it) > > >> > > >> 2 $ ?@# > > >> > > >> As Henry said, to store an intermediate value in a verb's evaluation > for use > > _after_ it's application, you must use an explicit verb, for example: > > >> > > >> ,~ @ (3 : 'a=: y') @ (?@#) > > >> > > >> Cheers, > > >> Louis > > >> > > >>> On 21 Nov 2019, at 03:26, Nimp O <tr...@outlook.com> wrote: > > >>> > > >>> Hello, simple question. > > >>> > > >>> This behaviour surprised me. > > >>> > > >>> (a,a=.?@#)'01234' > > >>> 2 4 > > >>> > > >>> 3 : 'a,a=.?@#y' '01234' > > >>> 1 1 > > >>> > > >>> Why a is not equal to a in the first case? How can I save the roll > as an > > intermediate result in the tacit version? > > >>> Thanks. > > >>> -------------------------------------------------------------------- > > >>> -- 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
