Thanks Pablo and Devon, I was expecting both your results. However my Linux j901 and android phone both give the same odd behaviour.
If I keep reassigning kk=.>:kk then i.5 advances also!!! On Tue, 14 Sept 2021 at 15:21, Devon McCormick <devon...@gmail.com> wrote: > I get nothing like this, only what one would expect: > kk=.i.5 > kk > 0 1 2 3 4 > kk=.>:kk > kk > 1 2 3 4 5 > i.5 > 0 1 2 3 4 > > You must have done something else too but I can't think what it might be as > I don't think re-assignment of J primitive is possible (in J). > > > > On Tue, Sep 14, 2021 at 10:03 AM Pablo Landherr <pablo.landh...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > No. I get: > > > > kk=.i.5 > > > > kk > > > > 0 1 2 3 4 > > > > kk=.>:kk > > > > kk > > > > 1 2 3 4 5 > > > > i.5 > > > > 0 1 2 3 4 > > > > On Tue, Sep 14, 2021 at 3:59 PM Jon Quant <quanty....@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > Dear all, > > > > > > I have tried the following code and get unexpected results and wanted > > your > > > seasoned advice. > > > > > > kk=.i.5 > > > kk > > > 0 1 2 3 4 > > > kk=.>:kk > > > kk > > > 1 2 3 4 5 > > > i.5 > > > 1 2 3 4 5 > > > kk=.>:kk > > > i.5 > > > 2 3 4 5 6 > > > > > > So this modifies the behaviour of the 'i.' verb! Is there a (functional > > > programming) grammar rule that says we must not modify a variable/noun > > > which is also in the expression? > > > > > > Thanks > > > Jon > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > 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
