Oh yes, I like this!  n is any noun, not just an atom.

Henry Rich

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dan Bron
> Sent: Monday, October 29, 2007 8:31 PM
> To: 'Programming forum'
> Subject: RE: [Jprogramming] Inverse of <;.1
> 
> A synthesis just occurred to me.  This is unrelated to the 
> "more ambitious" proposal I mentioned earlier, but still solves the
> problem.
> 
> I wrote (0): 
> >  perhaps the raze of the result of affixing a fill element
> >  within each box, as in:
> >
> >   <;._1  :. ([: ; ({.~ -@:>:@:#)&.>)
> >   <;._2  :. ([: ; ({.~    >:@:#)&.>)
> 
> Then elaborated (1):
> >  Maybe, in line with other uses of  !.  to specify fill, a
> >  new fit could be defined, such that:
> >
> >    <;._2!.n  ^:_1   <==>   [: ; ,&n&.>
> 
> But worried (ibid):
> >  the phrase suggested above might have to be expressed as
> >  <;._2^:_1!.n   [...]  If that's the case, I'm less
> >  enthused about the idea
> 
> However, we could extend the proposal thus:
> 
>     <;._2!.n   <==>    <;._2@:(,&n)  :. ([: ; ,&n&.>)
> 
> (similarly for  <;._1!.n  and equivalences apply to monads 
> only. Perhaps initially only for vector arguments.)
> 
> That is, the fit WOULD apply to the nominal verb:  it would 
> specify the fret.  It would also apply to the obverse as laid out in
> my previous message.
> 
> Advantages:
> 
>    (A)  Concise.
> 
>    (B)  Solves a common problem.
>         (B.i)  No worrying about losing the shard.
> 
>    (C)  Backwards compatible
> 
>    (D)  Centralized, easily optimized.  In particular, in
>         <;._2  y,n  the catenation (and attendant copying
>         of  y  )  need not be performed.
> 
>    (E)  Could easily provide for other optimizations 
>         which would support a large body of extant and
>         likey future code. In particular,  f&.>&.(<;._2!.n) 
>         could be optimized for well-behaved  f  (the 
>         initial definitionof "well behaved" might be
>         "doesn't change the type or shape of its 
>         argument")  
> 
>         For example:  
> 
>                dtb&.>&.(<;._2!.LF)  NB.  dtb from lines
> 
>         (though this is "poorly behaved" because it 
>          changes the shape of its argument).
>  
>    (F)  In the spirit of !.
> 
>    (G)  In the spirit of  ^:_1 
> 
> Drawbacks (in addition to those associated with every 
> backwards-compatible change to the language):
> 
>     (A)  <;._2  sans fit couldn't have an inverse, or,
>          if it did, it would be inconsistent with the
>          definition and inverse of fitted cut.
> 
>     (B)  Every  !.  reduces the consistency of J; they
>          should be used sparingly, if at all.
> -Dan
> 
> (0)  
> http://www.jsoftware.com/pipermail/programming/2007-October/00
> 8564.html
> (1)  
> http://www.jsoftware.com/pipermail/programming/2007-October/00
> 8569.html
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> For information about J forums see 
> http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm

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

Reply via email to