Thanks!

I know about dissect and do indeed use it a lot. In this case, dissect doesn’t
make it really clear (at least to me) that only changes in y are fed to
repeated calls with ^: as you said.

Regards, F.

PS Interestingly enough, although I got the answer from Pascal Jasmin,
I did not received yours email but grabbed it from the email archive. 


> Welcome to J, and to the Forum!
> 
> This looks right to me.  In the last case the verb is 3&(*:@[) which 
> always produces 9:
> 
>     3&(*:@[) "0 i. 10
> 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9
>     3&(*:@[) 1 2 3 4
> 9
> 
> You execute it 4 times, getting 4 results of 9.
> 
> The difference with the first case is that there you are executing
> 
> x *:@] y
> 
> which squares y, not x; and y changes with each iteration.
> 
> If you haven't seen Dissect, give it a look.  It can help with things 
> like this (I didn't try it on this example).
> 
> You say you see a change between 8.07 and 9.01: please report that.  I 
> don't think there should be a difference except for rare cases.
> 
> Henry Rich
> 
> 

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm

Reply via email to