Linda asked:
> Why not use this:
> ":>:".'34.5'
> 35.5
My purpose in using
": >: _&". '34.5'
was to show the intended action of the phrase I was trying to build, in which I
wanted the default-value specification to occur. Of course, the _& accomplishes
nothing in that example, but it did turn out to be crucial to the error I
encountered.
Thank you for challenging that qualification, though, because it provoked me to
rethink its inclusion. I see now that I had overengineered this code to
accomodate invalid input, which is not good practice. The code is better when
simplified in the manner you suggested. Since the main value of this verb will
be to communicate what J is like to those unfamiliar with J, the increased
clarity is particularly important.
I count this as another (small) example of how J's notational emphasis rewards
better design.
Tracy
____________________________________________________________________________________
Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your home page.
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
