> Note that getting useful linear representations from 5!:5 becomes > significantly harder if it must also represent nouns which contain > non-nouns.
No, I was not necessarily referring to wicked (non-standard) nouns. I will try to provide more details during the weekend. On Fri, Mar 6, 2020 at 12:33 PM Raul Miller <rauldmil...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Fri, Mar 6, 2020 at 12:09 PM Jose Mario Quintana > <jose.mario.quint...@gmail.com> wrote: > > The short answer is: I would like, at least, to change whatever needs to be > > changed in the interpreter to produce and display proper linear > > representations (LRs) of adverbs which currently have faulty ones, and > > change what needs to be changed in the documentation to legitimize the past > > (and current?) behavior of tie (`), train (`:6), and agenda (@.) by > > removing needless restrictions, or at least preserve the behavior. > > Note that getting useful linear representations from 5!:5 becomes > significantly harder if it must also represent nouns which contain > non-nouns. > > (An issue, here, is that J currently doesn't provide operations to > build such structures, and verifying the correctness of the > abstraction leaks becomes a whole new issue when we also demand a > correct and robust system.) > > A "simple" solution, here, might be to extend J with something like ` > which takes an atomic representation for its left argument and builds > a gerund (or maybe "gerund" -- we might also need to sort out our > terminology) whose left-most element is the value represented by that > atomic representation. (And, deals with the memory management issues > and domain issues which result.) But even this level of "simple" might > be above the level of complexity for j901 bugfixes. (And need some > supporting use cases -- practical examples where this is not just > possible but also is clearly the right approach.) (And, I don't know > if this (`) analog would be a primitive or a foreign...) > > So, for J901 at least, I think it makes sense to restrict focus to > getting 5!:5 to represent the things that J901 represents. (I already > have problems keeping up with all the details that Henry has been > working with.) > > I suspect my point of view is disappointing to you, but I am hoping > you can at least understand where I'm coming from... > > 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
