Yes, or unless x has length greater than 1:
2 1 >@{ 10;11;22;33
22 11
2 1 {:: 10;11;22;33
|length error
| 2 1 {::10;11;22;33
But for this specific case (which shouldn't see either of these situations) the
change sounds like it will be fine. I agree Dan that 1 {:: p. Is clearer and
have made the change.
Thanks,
Ric
> From: Henry Rich
>
> >@{ is the same as {:: unless y is an atom:
>
> 0{::<'a'
> |length error
> | 0 {::<'a'
> >0{<'a'
> a
>
> Dan Bron wrote:
> > Ric wrote:
> >> I was thinking of updating the definition of "roots" on the wiki
> page:
> >> "http://www.jsoftware.com/jwiki/Phrases/Polynomials";
> >> 1&{::@p.
> >
> > For the sakes of clarity and brevity, I would express this as
> >
> > 1 {:: p.
> >
> > And no, there is no reason to prefer >@{ over {:: in this
> context, as
> > they have identical effects.
> >
> > -Dan
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> -
> > For information about J forums see
> http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
> >
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
