On 8/7/07, Roger Hui <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> There have not been any changes in the interpreter
> in this regard.  Perhaps the defn of "load" was changed
> and that could have changed the behaviour.  Or perhaps
> you did your experiments using "load", thinking that
> it was equivalent to 0!:0@< .

On reflection, I have realized that this latter is the case:

I was thinking that the local context I saw when using
'load' was a property of 0!:0 rather than being a consequence
of load having an explicit (rather than tacit) definition.

Thanks,

-- 
Raul
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm

Reply via email to