Triple negative, with a "yet", no less. Not sure I understand your sentence, but your example and my description do not contradict each other.
----- Original Message ----- From: Jose Mario Quintana <[email protected]> Date: Monday, January 11, 2010 14:59 Subject: Re: [Jprogramming] Adverb and conjunction parsing rules To: Programming forum <[email protected]> > I cannot not disagree; yet, according to the interpreter: > > +(/\) > +/\ > ┌─────┬─┐ > │┌─┬─┐│\│ > ││+│/││ │ > │└─┴─┘│ │ > └─────┴─┘ > (+/)\ > > > > > > ________________________________ > From: Roger Hui <[email protected]> > To: Programming forum <[email protected]> > Sent: Mon, January 11, 2010 2:38:52 PM > Subject: Re: [Jprogramming] Adverb and conjunction parsing rules > > I would consider f g h in isolation to be a verb phrase, > being a phrase whose value is a verb. To achieve > isolation sometimes you need parentheses. > > "The left argument of an adverb is the entire verb > phrase that precedes it" is fine as far as it goes, > but there are situations when you need to make > finer distinctions than what the sentence literally says. > For example, sum=:+/ is a verb phrase but > in sum=:+/\ you have to understand that > the entire verb phrase that precedes \ is > NOT the argument of the adverb \ . That is, > it's different from (sum=:+/) \ . > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Oleg Kobchenko <[email protected]> > Date: Monday, January 11, 2010 11:19 > Subject: Re: [Jprogramming] Adverb and conjunction parsing rules > To: Programming forum <[email protected]> > > > > So why isn't my gm phrase parsed as (# %: *)/ ? > > > > > > Simply, because (f g h) is not a Verb Phrase; > > it is a Train (viz a Fork), which has lower "bonding" > > priority than Verb Phrase (made of Conjunctions and Adverbs). > > > > > > > > > From: Bill Harris <[email protected]> > > > > > > I've learned that when I see an apparent discrepancy between the > > > documentation and behavior in J, the problem lies in my > > understanding.> > > > So can someone help me make sense of this? > > > > > > (9!:3) 6 > > > (23 & > +. 12 & <) > > > (23&>) +. (12&<) > > > > > > and > > > > > > gm =: # %: */ > > > gm > > > # %: (*/) > > > > > > and (from http://www.jsoftware.com/help/dictionary/dicte.htm) > > > > > > "Moreover, the left argument of an adverb or conjunction is > > the entire > > > verb phrase that precedes it. Thus, in the phrase +/ . */b , the > > > rightmost adverb / applies to the verb derived from the > phrase > > +/ . * , > > > not to the verb * ." > > > > > > Indeed, > > > > > > +/ . */ > > > ((+/) .*)/ > > > > > > So why isn't my gm phrase parsed as (# %: *)/ ? > > > > > > Having to teach this to others is, as usual, helping me > learn > > some of > > > the points I've ignored ... which brings up an idea: if any > of > > us are > > > still in the process of learning J (I guess that's most of > us, > > at least > > > at some level), would it be a good idea for us to volunteer > to > > teach it > > > to others? We could get two results: better J skills and more > > > J'ugglers. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
