Small correction: '[ -: $@($,)'

On 8/21/20, Joseph Novakovich <[email protected]> wrote:
> I would expect '[ -: $@$' to hold, which this would break.
>
> Cheers
>
> On 8/21/20, 'Rob Hodgkinson' via Programming <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>> Henry I am just clarifying here but not advocating one way or the other
>> ….
>>
>> This feature is part of q (or k) and is implemented as an extension of
>> the
>> reshape function (which is # in q).
>>
>> Here is a q sample,
>>
>> q)args:("Code";33;"Name";"Iverson";"Age";34)                 /Comment:
>> Here
>> my list might be of Key/Value pairs
>>
>> q)args
>> "Code"
>> 33
>> "Name"
>> "Iverson"
>> "Age"
>> 34
>>
>> q)0N 2#args
>>      /Comment: q uses the NULL value (0N) to say “I know the list is in
>> pairs, so work out the rows" (hence here 3 x 2)
>> "Code" 33
>> "Name" "Iverson"
>> "Age”  34
>>
>>
>> The equivalent mechanism in APL or J is along these lines:
>>
>>    args=: 'Code';33;'Name';'Iverson';'Age';34
>>
>>    ((($args)%2),2)$args                     /Comment: To save entering
>> this
>> phrase in J, David is proposing to use the _ character to request it be
>> computed, so   ( _ 2$args) would produce the same
>> ┌────┬───────┐
>> │Code│33 │
>> ├────┼───────┤
>> │Name│Iverson│
>> ├────┼───────┤
>> │Age │34 │
>> └────┴───────┘
>>
>> The feature was an enhancement of the shape function in q, mostly useful
>> where the list contained repeated groups.
>>
>> I am not advocating or rejecting it, just pointing out it was a handy
>> convenience in limited cases.
>>
>> …/Regards Rob
>>
>>> On 21 Aug 2020, at 10:40 am, Henry Rich <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>> I don't think it fits into the language where you want to put it.
>>>
>>> (x $ y) is to be used when you know what you want the shape to be.  It
>>> sounds like you are guessing at it, and asking $ to make a plausible
>>> guess.  I say that is a different function.
>>>
>>> The fact that you can handle only one infinity is a warning signal that
>>> the definition is incomplete.
>>>
>>> Henry Rich
>>>
>>> On 8/20/2020 8:33 PM, David Lambert wrote:
>>>> The proposal is for dyadic $ only.
>>>>
>>>> Processing experimental data which sometimes arrives in irregular
>>>> chunks
>>>> I often end up with a vector.
>>>>    q: # data
>>>> helps me figure out how to match data to the experiment.  The proposal
>>>> solves the case where one of the inner shape atoms is unknown.
>>>>
>>>> If this is a sufficiently common situation, and Pascal shows interest,
>>>> it
>>>> might be a worthwhile extension.  On the other hand, the
>>>> implementations
>>>> presented meet need, and I have these.  It breaks only the unlikely
>>>> programs that depend on _ triggering an error.  J need only check for
>>>> infinity if x is float, and I'd think the engine already tests the type
>>>> of x.
>>>>
>>>> |On Tuesday, August 18, 2020, 07:51:03 p.m. EDT, Henry Rich
>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>> |This is a proposed change only to dyad and $ , is that right?
>>>> |What problem does this solve?
>>>>
>>>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> 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
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>> For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
>>
>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm

Reply via email to