Your explicit form is nothing to be ashamed of. It's
better than lots of gerunds and boxing.
Taking advantage of your precise problem, you could write
list_b =. list_b , list_b (+/%#)@(index_b&{)@[^:(0 = ]) index_a { list_a
Just make sure you DON'T write
list_b =. list_b ([ , (+/%#)@(index_b&{)@[^:(0 = ])) index_a { list_a
because that would lose the in-place append.
Henry Rich
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Robert O'Boyle
> Sent: Friday, March 28, 2008 11:52 AM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: [Jprogramming] gerunds and looping through matrices
>
> I have struggled with a problem lately that the forum might
> be able to help
> me with.
>
>
>
> Here is the script within a bigger explicitly defined verb in
> which I am
> using the IF control structure
>
>
>
> if. (index_a { list_a) = 0
>
> do.
>
> list_b =. list_b, (+/%#) index_b { list_b
>
> else.
>
> list_b =. list_b, index_a { list_a
>
> end.
>
>
>
> To paraphrase, I have a list_b of which I want to estimate
> the last value. I
> check an indexed value in another list_a to see if it is 0 or
> not. If 0, the
> last value of list_b becomes a mean (based on yet another set
> of indices,
> index_b) of some values within list_b. If not 0, the last
> value of list_b
> becomes the value from list_a that I checked to see whether
> or not it was 0.
>
>
>
>
> I was trying to use a gerund with two verbs for each choice
> but got stumped
> on the nouns. There is obviously more here than one x and one y term.
> Perhaps this is a more general question. When one has more
> that an x and y
> term, how can multiple nouns be used in gerunds and agendas?
> Or perhaps this
> is the entirely wrong approach.
>
>
>
> Bob
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> For information about J forums see
> http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
