Yes, the order of the values is different in some cases.

To compare, you could use -:&(/:~)

Thanks,

-- 
Raul


On Tue, Jul 13, 2021 at 12:17 AM Devon McCormick <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> I'm a bit late to the party but a little QA never hurts:
>
>    6!:2 'rrBS=. I.+./(|:3$,: i. 10) (+./ @:E.)"1/  sep n'         NB. Bryan
> Schott
> 2.50109
>    6!:2 'rrBJ=. I.,+./"2]1=($&~.)"1(0 1 2,1 2 3,2 3 4,:3 4 5){"2
> 1(6#10)#:n'  NB. Bo Jacoby
> 1.32111
>    6!:2 'rrRM=. 1e5+I.+./(3#"1":i.10 1) +./@E."1/ ":1e5+i.9e5 1'  NB. Raul
> Miller
> 1.12046
>    6!:2 'rrJPJ=. ssd3 i.33219'                                    NB.
> Jan-Pieter Jacobs
> 0.0121709
>
>    $&.>rrBJ;rrRM;rrBS;rrJPJ       NB. Shapes are the same...
> +-----+-----+-----+-----+
> |33219|33219|33219|33219|
> +-----+-----+-----+-----+
>
> But
>    rrBS-:rrRM
> 0
>    #rrBS-.rrRM
> 10819
>    #rrBS-.~rrRM
> 10819
>
> And
>    rrBS-:rrBJ
> 1
>
> However
>    rrRM-:rrJPJ
> 0
> But
>    #rrRM-.rrJPJ  NB. They have the same contents.
> 0
>
> So, rrBJ-:rrBS and rrRM-:rrJPJ but -.rrBJ-:rrJPJ.
>
> This fixes things:
>
>    6!:2 'rrBS=. *1e5+*I.+./(|:3$,: i. 10) (+./ @:E.)"1/  argBS'         NB.
> Bryan Schott
> 2.38279
>    6!:2 'rrBJ=. *1e5+*I.,+./"2]1=($&~.)"1(0 1 2,1 2 3,2 3 4,:3 4 5){"2
> 1(6#10)#:n'  NB. Bo Jacoby
> 1.31562
>    rrBJ-:rrRM
> 1
>    rrBJ-:rrJPJ
> 0
>    #rrBJ-.rrJPJ
> 0
>
> On Wed, Jul 7, 2021 at 8:12 PM Hauke Rehr <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Exactly, one of the coding style guidelines.
> > Another one being KISS: keep it simple, stupid!
> > I consider these two generally recommendable.
> >
> > I also read about someone saying in a job interview
> > he doesn’t write code “larger than me head”.
> > (It’s been written “me”, reflecting his pronunciation)
> > Interviewer: “So you don’t write functions so
> > complicated you don’t understand them.”
> > Candidate: “No, literally: if it’s size is
> > larger than me head, it’s too long.”
> > Something like that. This is a way of KISS.
> > But the way the interviewer understood it
> > would have been a better way to do KISS imo.
> >
> > I also consider RERO and FEFO good practices,
> > but as with most of the other ones out there,
> > it’s personal taste which ones one wants to adhere to.
> > (Release Early Release Often/Fail Early Fail Often)
> > (FEFO: an Erlang coder’s mantra)
> >
> > … and then there’s dogfood:
> > “Eating one’s own dogfood” means using the software
> > one develops regularly oneself. Not always applicable,
> > but it usually makes a huge difference both in quality
> > and usability where employed.
> >
> >
> > Am 07.07.21 um 17:48 schrieb Thomas Bulka:
> > > Am Mi., 7. Juli 2021 um 17:45 Uhr schrieb 'Mike Day' via Programming
> > > <[email protected]>:
> > >>
> > >> Sorry, Hauke,  what’s the DRY principle?
> > >> Mike
> > >
> > > Hi Mike,
> > >
> > > I think it means "don't repeat yourself".
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > >
> > > Thomas
> > > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > 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
> >
>
>
> --
>
> Devon McCormick, CFA
>
> Quantitative Consultant
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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