Early J had a complete language of bidents/tridents. It was beautiful
and powerful. Not five people understood it. It was removed in J5,
never to return.
Henry Rich
On 5/6/2020 3:00 PM, 'Pascal Jasmin' via Programming wrote:
what should (a v) do? (if it were valid)
then what would (a v v) or (a v v v) do?
option 1: change v into an adverb (letting it return functions or return an lr
that will be evaled to any form of speech), and then run v 'a'
option 2: Compose v on (u a). (a v) remains an adverb.
btw, there is a missing composition operator in J. I'd suggest O. (on) as a
conjunction where O. allows for both dyadic u and v.
O. =: (u@:v) : ([ u v)
so option 2 above would be v O. (u a) . This doesn't seem useful because you
could just write the adverb a ( v O.) for the same result. A generalization of
option 2 is there is some implied conjunction partially bound to v that gets
executed in (a v)
Where option 2 gets interesting is in the expression
v1 (a1 v2) (a2 v3)
There is no reason to write such an expression if the intent were for v1 to be an
argument to the adverb (a1 v2) if there is an implied conjunction meaning. Instead the
above example would be a multi adverb where parameters are "templated in"
u1 u2 (v1 (a1 v2) (a2 v3)) ==> v1 v2 O.(u1 a1) v3 O.(u2 a2 )
Any other options/proposals?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
--
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
https://www.avg.com
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
