Never did I claim to be original.
Just like everyone else I stand on the shoulders of giants.
My solution was the first one which was equivalent to recf from Jackson, in
meeting his (implied) requirements. And it was a general solution.
If Jackson then, in the same thread, adopts this solution, not mentioning my
name, I express my opinion about that. Nothing more, nothing less.
I appreciate it that you mentioned Quintana as originator for seq, if I
remember correctly, you did that before. IMO it is appropriate to give
credits at least in the same thread.
Apart from that - this is a programming forum after all - it's worth
noticing that Jackson's upd is not equivalent to his recf
2 4 6 8 10 (+ recf; + upd; <@;) i. 2 2
+-----+-------------------------------+----------------+
| 0 1|+---+---+---+-----+-----+-----+|+----------+---+|
| 2 3||0 1|2 3|6 7|12 13|20 21|30 31|||2 4 6 8 10|0 1||
| ||2 3|4 5|8 9|14 15|22 23|32 33||| |2 3||
| 2 3|+---+---+---+-----+-----+-----+|+----------+---+|
| 4 5| | |
| | | |
| 6 7| | |
| 8 9| | |
| | | |
|12 13| | |
|14 15| | |
| | | |
|20 21| | |
|22 23| | |
| | | |
|30 31| | |
|32 33| | |
+-----+-------------------------------+----------------+
Further, if I replace
reboss0 =: [: > [: +&.>/\.&.|. <@],<"[EMAIL PROTECTED]
by
reboss1 =: [: +&.>/\.&.|. <@],<"[EMAIL PROTECTED]
such that it is equivalent with upd, than the difference in performance with
upd is far less than 30% and due to &.|.
a =: +:>: i.5000
compare tests
a + upd m 1 1
a reboss0 m 1.2605637 0.95667504
a reboss1 m 1.0818945 0.97924941
a + recf m 5.1013971 0.14715895
R.E. Boss
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
