"R.E. Boss" <[email protected]> wrote:

>   ? b. 0
>
> 0 0 0
>
>
>
>   ?. b. 0
>
> _ 0 0
>
>
>
> Is this intended?

   ?.10#10
6 5 9 2 4 9 0 7 0 4
   ?."0]10#10
6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6

Before 6.02, ?. had rank 0, which caused inconsistent behavior,
since "0 should have no effect on a verb that is already rank 0.

It is impossible to write a user-defined verb that emulates the
behavior of ?. without making its rank infinite. As far as I know,
this was the only J primitive that had this kind of behavior.

-- Mark D. Niemiec <[email protected]>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm

Reply via email to