On Thu, 30 Jul 2009, Bo Jacoby wrote:
> Then I make a dyadic verb, ms1, computing mu,sigma
> ms1 =. 4 : 'm,%:((*/y-1 2)*%/x-1 3)+(*-.)m=.(y-1)*%/x-1 2'
> test:
> 6 ms1 14
> 16.25 3.49106
>
> When I try to simplify by the hook (m,f m) === (,f)m
> ms2 =. 4 : '(,(%:((*/y-1 2)*%/x-1 3)+(*-.)))(y-1)*%/x-1 2'
rewrite it into
m, %: @: ( ((*/y-1 2)*%/x-1 3) + (*-.) ) m
..................
a constant verb + hook
fork
ms2 =. 4 : 'm , %: @: ( ((*/y-1 2)*%/x-1 3) + (*-.) ) m=.(y-1)*%/x-1 2'
then simplify by the hook (m,f m) === (,f)m
ms2 =. 4 : '(, %: @: ( ((*/y-1 2)*%/x-1 3) + (*-.) )) (y-1)*%/x-1 2'
However isn't ms1 more comprehensible?
--
regards,
====================================================
GPG key 1024D/4434BAB3 2008-08-24
gpg --keyserver subkeys.pgp.net --recv-keys 4434BAB3
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
