Thanks. then defining sine as 1&o."0 should be fine.

On Sun, Jan 17, 2021, 8:07 AM Henry Rich <[email protected]> wrote:

> What makes them efficient is IRS.  1&o. supports IRS; 1&o."0 does not.
> Is you define sin as 1&o."0, sin will run fast, but sin"0 will not.
>
> Henry Rich
>
> On 1/16/2021 6:24 PM, bill lam wrote:
> > IIUC All atomic math functions are rank 0 but support IRS so that they
> are
> > as efficient as rank infinity on long array arguments.
> >
> > The question should be that
> > is 1&o."0 as efficient as 1&o. on long arrays.
> >
> > On Sun, Jan 17, 2021, 12:32 AM Henry Rich <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >> Terminology.  If verb v has IRS, it can handle v"n internally without a
> >> rank loop.
> >>
> >> + has IRS.  +"n does not need a rank loop.
> >>
> >> +"n does not have IRS.  +"n"n2 does need a rank loop.
> >>
> >> +/@:*"1 has IRS, but +/@:* does not - that's how they're coded.
> >>
> >> 1&o."0 does not have IRS.
> >>
> >> Henry Rich
> >>
> >> On 1/16/2021 11:27 AM, bill lam wrote:
> >>> but the verb in this question is
> >>> (1&o.)"0
> >>>
> >>> even if 1&o. has IRS, does (1&o.)"0 also has IRS ?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Sun, Jan 17, 2021, 12:02 AM Henry Rich <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> m&v does have IRS if v does.  I didn't know that until I just checked.
> >>>>
> >>>> Henry Rich
> >>>>
> >>>> On 1/16/2021 7:10 AM, bill lam wrote:
> >>>>> I'm not sure if 1&o."0 has IRS (integrated rank support) or not. If
> it
> >>>>> doesn't then I think the phase with infinity rank is fine.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Sat, Jan 16, 2021, 7:02 PM Arnab Chakraborty <[email protected]>
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>>> Dear all,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>       Just wondering if the correct defn of sin shouldn't be
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> sin=:1&o."0
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> instead of
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> sin=:1&o.
> >>>>>>     which has rank infinity.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> With the rank infinity definition +/@sin behaves just like +/@:sin
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> But, ideally, +/@sin 4 5 should be a list of two numbers, while
> >> +/@:sin
> >>>>>> should be their sum.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Just like, +/@*: and +/@:*:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Thanks and regards,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Arnab
> >>>>>>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>>>> For information about J forums see
> >> http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
> >>>>>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>>> 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
> >>
> >> --
> >> 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
>
>
> --
> 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

Reply via email to