Raul Miller <rauldmiller <at> gmail.com> writes: > > But x and y are "more special" than m, n, u and v. If they are, there is no evidence of this other than discussion by the watercooler, here. LOL > > If you wanted, you could define: > > nl_z_=: 4!:1@(] -. -.~)&(i.4)
No, I don't want to re-define language elements for this issue. In fact, I could just avoid using nl altogether and rely on namelist instead. It has the expected (and, correct, so it feels) behavior. > Note, however, that this would deprive you of the left argument for names. > > For example other words, currently: > > '~wd' names_z_'' > > gives you all the z locale names which do not contain wd and > > '*wd' names_z_'' > > gives you all the z locale name which do contain wd and > > 'wd' names_z_'' I will be deprived of these because the behavior of nl is unpredictable... although, to be fair, the last example works with namelist as well. > > Meanwhile, changing the definition of nl_z_ does not eliminate the > GOTCHAs -- it changes them, but does not eliminate them. It would eliminate the GOTCHAS that -- despite sharing a mnemonic with namelist -- nl is just a misbehaving cousin. LOL nl is shorter to type... offers a couple of features that namelist is missing... but doesn't play nicely with others. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
