X: and Y: would probably be more readable. And, sure, that would need a space in typical cases.
That said, personally, I'm not particularly fond of working with boxed lists in tacit dyads. Thanks, -- Raul On Mon, Mar 2, 2020 at 3:13 PM 'Pascal Jasmin' via Programming <[email protected]> wrote: > > consider the adverbs > > X =: (&({::))(@:[) > > Y =: (&({::))(@:]) > > These are useful for extracting an item from either x or y parameter lists > (that may be boxed) tacitly > > 2 Y i.3 equivalent to (2 {:: ]) i.3 > > shorter and doesn't require parentheses if not the right most part of a fork. > > I'd propose {::: as a built in for Y, and {::. as built-in for X > > Though it is more typing to use compared to Y and X, it would allow for 0 > spacing readability of adverbs/modifiers. > > You cannot type 2Y (as legal expression/name). You could type 2{::: > > Forks are more readable when all/as much as possible of the spaces separate > the tines. > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
