> If there is ever an attack on the supreme majesty that is Cloak, I do
hope n: is implemented instead.
Unfortunately, once a black cat is out of the bag it becomes potential prey
making them an endangered species. If worse comes to worst, I bet your
proposed n: could become handy. However, it would be a band-aid for a
symptom of a weakness that has been noted, publicly and privately, by
current and past members of the forum (you included if I recall correctly);
namely, J does not have first-class functions (verbs are meant to take and
produce nouns, and adverbs and conjunctions are meant to take nouns and
verbs and produce nouns, verbs, and conjunctions). This weakness goes
unnoticed unless one attempts to perform certain kinds of tasks (e.g., to
dynamically produce and execute lots of verbs, and becomes, in particular,
virtually impossible to do so tacitly, unless one releases a black cat to
catch the mice).
I am aware that BQN has first-class functions. Is there any other array
language that also has them?
On Fri, Jan 13, 2023 at 7:38 PM 'Pascal Jasmin' via Programming <
programm...@jsoftware.com> wrote:
>
> To answer Raul, I did not use r2m after all. oa through the magic of
cloak allows 'Adverb' oa ('X' oa in example) where Adverb has a noun
parameter.
>
> > I had: u n: A y is (u y) A y. Whereas you have u r2m A y as simply (u
y) A.
>
> if [x] u n: A y produced the result of x u y as input to A, then that is
a legal way to get Adverb noun inputs from a verb phrase. An adverb can
create modifiers is the main benefit, and necessity for the functionality.
>
>
> I feel that u n: A y as (u y) A y would be for producing verbs and noun
results, and can be written as 1 : '(u y) A y' though that doesn't let you
produce a conjunction from A and return (C y).
>
> If there is ever an attack on the supreme majesty that is Cloak, I do
hope n: is implemented instead.
>
>
> On Friday, January 13, 2023 at 05:39:30 p.m. EST, Elijah Stone <
elro...@elronnd.net> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> Oh, my n: is a little less expressive than your r2m. I had: u n: A y is
(u y)
> A y. Whereas you have u r2m A y as simply (u y) A.
>
> On Fri, 13 Jan 2023, Elijah Stone wrote:
>
> > I proposed your 'r2m' as a primitive n: (for 'now') a while ago, and
received
> > a lukewarm response. I don't think it can be implemented other than as
a
> > primitive. (And I still think it would be a good idea to have.)
> >
> > Your solution which quotes the modifier name works, but I find it
> > distasteful.
> > And it has some trouble with conjunctions; how do you disambiguate the
> > following?
> >
> > (u r2m) C v
> >
> > u C (v r2m)
> >
> > (u r2m) C (v r2m)
> >
> > You can't, so you would need a separate form for each.
> >
> > On Fri, 13 Jan 2023, 'Pascal Jasmin' via Programming wrote:
> >
> >> X =: 1 : 'm&+'
> >>
> >>
> >> What definition of r2m (result to m argument) below would allow X to
see
> > the result of + y (or x+y) as its m argument?
> >>
> >> + r2m X 3
> >>
> >> purpose would be for X to produce a modifier from application of
"verb".
> > Requirement is only that y argument (3 above) is outside any verb
phrase.
> >>
> >> Jose/Dan's Cloak magic? turn result into atomic or linear
representation?
> >> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
>
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
> >
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
