Not necessarily. The definition is completed when all arguments are supplied. If the definition of an adverb or conjunction contains x or y the definition is delayed until those arguments are supplied.
On Thu, Jun 9, 2011 at 12:40 AM, Ian Clark <[email protected]> wrote: > >>Anyways, adverbs and conjunctions are evaluated when building tacit > >>verbs, so J cannot defer their name resolution until later unless you > >>embed them in an explicit verb. > > > > Thanks, Raul -- I guess that perfectly describes the situation I've > > run up against. :) > > Plus the remedy, which is the one I've resorted to. :/ > > But IMO that's like Molière: Q: Why does morphine make you sleep?... > > Sorry Raul, I entirely missed the point, didn't I? ... > > If adverbs and conjunctions combine verbs into new verbs, then those > new verbs logically come into existence at definition time, not > run-time. Hence the conjunction has to be expanded at definition time: > you can't avoid it. > > Very taken-up right now with clearly explaining J concepts to novices. > Seems I needed this one explaining to myself: I was implicitly viewing > a conjunction as a kind of super-verb taking extended arguments. > > Definitely an APL mindset there > . > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
