The difference between name=: }:name and the others is that I can imagine the first pattern being used repeatedly (as in manipulating a stack). I can not see that the structure destroying phrases name=: , name name=: x ($,) name would be used repeatedly.
----- Original Message ----- From: Dan Bron <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Wednesday, July 12, 2006 10:35 am Subject: Re: [Jprogramming] special coding for stack operations > Greg> 10 Ts 'name=: }:name' > Roger> Thanks for the tip. > > While you're at it, can we have > > name =: , name > > and > > name =: x ($,) name NB. Assuming x <:&:(*:/) $ name > > I've wanted this fairly often; I wish I'd piped up every time it'd > occured to me. One example I remember is from > http://www.jsoftware.com/pipermail/beta/2006-April/000953.html : > > Dan> However, unlike y =. c } x ,: y , the phrase y =. , y > is not > Dan> optimized, so we're likely to lose our efficiency gains to > Dan> a large memcopy. > ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
