---Zsbán Ambrus wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 22, 2008 at 10:32, Sherlock, Ric wrote:
> > I was wondering why {: and }: don't have a dyadic form
> analogous to {. & }. ?
>
> We already have negative takes and negative drops if you want to take
> or drop from the end? The monadics are useful as quick synonyms. I
> think I use the four monadic synonyms more often than either positive
> or negative takes or drops. Most often I'm using {. or {: on
> two-element lists.
Yes, mental block re -ve indexing!!
Dyadic {: and }: aren't necessary, however it just seems logical that if I can
do
{: 'hello'
o
the natural extension is that I should be able to do
2{: 'hello'
lo
Just wondering if there was a reason other than that there are other
alternatives?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
