…sorry Hauke, that was meant for your eyes only. Ian
On Fri, 8 Jan 2021 at 12:36, Ian Clark <earthspo...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hauke, > > Might this help towards what you're aiming to do? > > https://code.jsoftware.com/wiki/User:Ian_Clark/credo > > Ian > > On Fri, 8 Jan 2021 at 11:50, Hauke Rehr <hauke.r...@uni-jena.de> wrote: > >> re-implementing in another language is often helpful >> I thought lua’s tables should lend themselves to the >> structure we have here, so I tried another approach – >> and found another quirk: >> your solution depends on the order of entry >> >> I had to add lines 50, 106–109 incl., and change >> lines 61 and 277 in order to get the correct results. >> >> >> Am 08.01.21 um 07:56 schrieb Hauke Rehr: >> > … and here’s a J implementation (and output) >> > but I stumbled upon another aspect that didn’t >> > match the specification as I understood it: >> > >> > consider the first example 13510: >> > your solution contains SIMUL which is 13509 >> > so I implemented that whenever either of them >> > has a 0, they match. I think that’s wrong. >> > The query may be more general but not more >> > specific than the things we want it to match. >> > >> > In my D implementation, it’s in the function >> > match in lines 105 through 117, (I already >> > wondered if it’s wrong but didn’t check again >> > after I found I got your ‘correct’ results); >> > in the J script, it’s where the comment says >> > what’s superfluous. >> > >> > … and I edited the 0 : 0 content (added an LF) >> > in order to not have to do too much parsing >> > >> > cheers, >> > Hauke >> > >> > >> > Am 08.01.21 um 04:41 schrieb Hauke Rehr: >> >> I jotted down a q&d-implementation in D. >> >> When I found out that your example doesn’t >> >> fit the hierarcical layout (multiple instances >> >> for 11, for example, so 11 isn’t a category >> >> even though there are things like 111), >> >> I ripped out the code depending on the hierarchy. >> >> >> >> The results agree with your results so I think >> >> this should be a correct re-implementation. >> >> >> >> Am 08.01.21 um 00:30 schrieb Hauke Rehr: >> >>> That post was written too soon. >> >>> Now that I’ve taken a look at what ordinal fractions >> >>> are meant to be, it looks to me more like what I think >> >>> I first came to know when learning some prolog. >> >>> I try to write down my new understanding of ordinal fractions, >> >>> in a more old-fashioned lingo of enums (concepts) >> >>> with their elements, and tagging data with them: >> >>> >> >>> there is an a priori given set of hierarchical enums >> >>> where subordinate ones’ range and meaning may depend >> >>> on superordinate ones >> >>> you tag any data by at most one element of each enum >> >>> where the elements themselves are part of the data >> >>> (and are tagged by themselves only) >> >>> any data with an incomplete set of tags is a category >> >>> all “leaf data” if thought of the hierarchy as a tree >> >>> is given a full set of tags. >> >>> then you just do some matching where everything matches unless >> >>> there is an enum the things to be matched both have an entry of >> >>> and where the entries don’t agree >> >>> >> >>> @bo: Is this “translation” of the concept of ordinal fractions >> adequate? >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >> >> > >> > >> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> > For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm >> > >> >> -- >> ---------------------- >> mail written using NEO >> neo-layout.org >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm >> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
