It's true that the axes of a rank 80 *dense* array must mostly have 0 or 1 elements.
But this constraint does not hold for sparse arrays. Consider this example: example=: 42 (<p:i.60)} 1 $. (60#1e9);(i.60);0 Of course, there are limits: 0 $. example |limit error And, ... it would be good to have some representative use cases involving such "fat sparse" arrays to guide some implementation decisions. If this would require non-trivial changes to the code base, it does not need to be a priority issue. But that's a different issue. Thanks, -- Raul On Wed, Nov 24, 2021 at 9:57 AM Henry Rich <[email protected]> wrote: > > No, the rank limitation will remain in the final release. > > With rank 80 the axes must mostly have 0 or 1 elements. The current > sparse implementation is not efficient for that. You will need to > rewrite your sparse application to use dense arrays. If you have a > particular application that needs rewriting I will be willing to offer > suggestions. > > Henry Rich > > On 11/24/2021 2:14 AM, 'Sergey Kamenev' via Programming wrote: > > Health to all! > > > > I am using the stable version J with level 80 rank in sparse arrays. > > > > A large rank can be useful for some purposes (only in sparse arrays, > > of course). > > > > Henry, can you lift the rank restriction in the stable release J 9.03? > > > > Nice day! > > Sergey Kamenev > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > 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
