I guess the word stitch already well chosen to explain its intend. It is
impossible to stitch a handkerchief of 4 inch square with another of 5 inch
square. However if they have prefix agreement, it is possible to stitch them
together.
(4 4$1) ,. (5 5$2)
|length error
| (4 4$1) ,.(5 5$2)
(4 4$1) ,. (4 5$2)
1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2
1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2
1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2
1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2
Hahn, Harvey wrote:
I can never seem to keep straight which primitive joins/assembles data
in which way, and so I created a "cheatsheet" for myself of the patterns
involved. In so doing, however, I noticed an interesting quasi-anomaly
that I was curious about:
"Append" (,) and "laminate" (,:) join various combinations of tables and
lists of differing sizes using fill characters as necessary to fill out
the joined/assembled data. Why does "stitch" (,.) NOT use (or is
incapable of using) fill characters in the same way? In other words,
what is there about stitching two tables, a table and a list, or two
lists where differing sizes are involved that prohibits filling to match
sizes? Why is "stitch" different? Is there some underlying structure
or meaning involved? I mean, I could manually do some "filling", and
then I could use "stitch"--why can it not happen automatically? I'm
just trying to learn more about how J works, and I was curious about
this seeming "anomaly" in the patterns for joining data. (The patterns
are quite organized, and even this "anomaly" has a pattern.) Thanks for
any insights!
Harvey
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
