Wow, that is too kewl: an explicit adverb that produces a tacit verb. Btw, I had to correspond directly with Raul to understand that because I thought the last line of his adverb contained a typo because it elided the y argument. But it works just right without the y. To see what I mean type the following first, before adding a right argument.
M RUN On Sat, Oct 22, 2011 at 10:02 AM, Raul Miller <[email protected]> wrote: > On Sat, Oct 22, 2011 at 9:50 AM, I wrote: >> RUN=: 1 :0 >> 'Q L D S F'=. >L:_1 m >> assert ($D) -: Q ,&$ L >> F e.~ ({ {&D)/S,L i.|.y >> ) > > > Actually, I should have written: > > RUN=: 1 :0 > 'Q L D S F'=. >L:_1 m > assert ($D) -: Q ,&$ L > F e.~ S ({ {&D)/@,~ L i. |. > ) > > This is a bug fix (S should go on the right, not on the left, though > this did not matter for the original test cases). > > But, also, there's no need to perform the assert every time the > machine gets used. > > -- > Raul > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm > -- (B=) <-----my sig Brian Schott ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
