I wrote > > I also wonder if there is any difference between (2"0)and (2&p.) .
Raul Miller <[email protected]> answered: > 8 8 ] .(2"0) 9 9 > 2 2 > 8 8 ] .(2&p.) 9 9 > 2 2 > 2 2 Thank you very much for the answer, Raul. I am having a hard time trying to understand what is going on here. We are considering the constant function f(x)=2, implemented in two ways: f1 =. 2"0 f2 =. 2&p. Considered monadic verbs there seems to be no difference, but somehow (f1) and (f2) are also dyadic verbs. ]n=.i.5 0 1 2 3 4 f1 n NB. correct monadic 2 2 2 2 2 f2 n NB. correct monadic 2 2 2 2 2 n f1 n NB. dyadic, no harm done 2 2 2 2 2 n f2 n NB. dyadic, unexpected result. 0 1 2 3 4 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 0 8 f1 9 9 9 NB. What is the use of the left argument anyway? |length error: f1 | 0 8 f1 9 9 9 0 8 f2 9 9 9 NB. zero seems to be special 9 9 9 2 2 2 0 f2 9 NB. Why not 2 ? 9 I could not predict this behaviour of dyadic (2"0) and (2&p.) from the dictionary descriptions of (") and (p.). Find din nye laptop på kelkoo.dk. Se de gode tilbud her - http://dk.yahoo.com/r/pat/mm ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
