First: rank "_1 is shorthand for "_1"_ . Every verb must have
nonnegative rank.
Second: it seems to me that the current definition of I. is more
convenient for some things (where f@I. is used) and less for others
(where I.@, is used). Is there any strong objective argument one way or
the other?
Henry Rich
On 10/26/2021 1:56 AM, Elijah Stone wrote:
On Mon, 25 Oct 2021, Marshall Lochbaum wrote:
If I. combined the two, functions written with the high-rank version
would usually fail in this case. Better to make the programmer
remember an idiom than to provide an incomplete version of it.
No definition could be less amenable to high-rank computation than the
current one. And for code which does want to go that mile, "_1 is
much nicer (IMHO).
-E
----------------------------------------------------------------------
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
