Yes, you're right, I misanalyzed. It goes like this:
1 2 3 starts with a usecount of 1, and a mark to indicate that the
usecount should be decremented when the sentence completes. [When the
usecount is decremented to 0 the block is freed].
Assignment to (a) increments the usecount, giving (
this didn't seem to work in beta 12 (latest all in one installer)
- Original Message -
From: Henry Rich
To: [email protected]
Sent: Tuesday, October 4, 2016 10:14 PM
Subject: Re: [Jprogramming] Early assignment WAS: Non-mutable arrays
Yes, this is executed in-place.
In genera
Yes, this is executed in-place.
In general, an assignment to a name whose value is not in use in another
name causes that value to become eligible for in-place execution (with
the possibility of early assignment) as long as the execution stack
contains nothing beyond the value to be assigned.
I made different suggestions in my beta post. namely, this expression should
also be optimized:
a=: ('b' ,~ 4,~])a =: 1 2 3
if possible, early assignment should also apply in scripts (even if through
tacit expressions).
In general though, I think the advice "assign to new name to be safe", w
IMO the dependence of so many preconditions that affects the behavior is
convoluted and unhelpful. Or at least these preconditions should be fine
tuned or overrided by some 9!:53 options.
On Oct 5, 2016 7:25 AM, "Henry Rich" wrote:
> The whole point of operation in place is to avoid having to
> On Oct 4, 2016, at 2:01 PM, Louis de Forcrand wrote:
>
> Maybe add a third setting to 9!:53 which copies a at the start of a tacit
> verb involving in place operations?
This is a good compromise between speed and sensible intuition.
I guess a memcpy only when in-place-operation is detected w
or check the various forums archives, eg
http://jsoftware.com/pipermail/programming/
--
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
> I apologize if this is a repeat. I am a subscriber to this list and
didn't see my post, so I feared maybe no one else did either.
There was only one such post. You can check the forum archives at
www.jsoftware.com/forumsearch, which are updated every 5 minutes. Just
click Search to see the most
a better version of assert
assert2 =: ]`([ 13!:8 (12"_))@.(0 e.])
assert 3 4 NB. returns nothing
assert 3 4 0
|assertion failure: assert
'bad' assert 3 4 0
|bad: assert
| 'bad'assert 3 4 0
what makes assert2 useful is that it raises an error if result includes 0 (can
also be easil
The syntax is incorrect for ddins. It expected a select statement. see
http://code.jsoftware.com/wiki/ODBC/Methods/Bulk_Insert
you may also try ddparm/ddsparm
On Oct 5, 2016 6:26 AM, "Michael Berry" wrote:
> Hello All,
>
> I apologize if this is a repeat. I am a subscriber to this list and di
Whatever you go with, I think the dictionary should be updated to
describe the new behavior.
Perhaps we need a new supplement to the parsing&execution appendix?
Thanks,
--
Raul
On Tue, Oct 4, 2016 at 7:25 PM, Henry Rich wrote:
> The whole point of operation in place is to avoid having to cop
In J8.04, an in-place operation can be vetted before it is executed, and
will have no effect if it fails.
Henry Rich
On 10/4/2016 3:01 PM, Louis de Forcrand wrote:
I second Raul; the behaviour described is very counter-intuitive. Maybe add a
third setting to 9!:53 which copies a at the start
The whole point of operation in place is to avoid having to copy an
in-placeable argument; copying the argument would not be a good solution.
After hearing the screams and dodging the dead cats, I have some proposals:
1. Early assignment (which is what we'll call the act of assigning an
interm
assert. can only be used in an explicit definition.
On Oct 4, 2016 3:59 PM, "Michael Berry" wrote:
> It certainly does! I had no idea there were so many debugging facilities.
>
> On Tue, Oct 4, 2016 at 5:49 PM, Raul Miller wrote:
>
> > assert is based on 13!:8 http://www.jsoftware.com/help/
>
Hello All,
I apologize if this is a repeat. I am a subscriber to this list and didn't
see my post, so I feared maybe no one else did either.
I am having trouble doing a bulk insert using ddins from the J ODBC
library. The error message is "Invalid object name" and the object name
included in the
It certainly does! I had no idea there were so many debugging facilities.
On Tue, Oct 4, 2016 at 5:49 PM, Raul Miller wrote:
> assert is based on 13!:8 http://www.jsoftware.com/help/
> dictionary/dx013.htm
>
> assert. is documented at http://www.jsoftware.com/help/
> dictionary/cassert.htm
>
>
assert is based on 13!:8 http://www.jsoftware.com/help/dictionary/dx013.htm
assert. is documented at http://www.jsoftware.com/help/dictionary/cassert.htm
One significant difference is that you can turn off assert. after you
are done testing (if the performance cost becomes significant) using
9!:3
Is there something I can read to understand the difference between the
control structure assert. and the standard library function assert and when
one or the other might be preferable?
-Michael
--
For information about J forums se
I second Raul; the behaviour described is very counter-intuitive. Maybe add a
third setting to 9!:53 which copies a at the start of a tacit verb involving in
place operations?
Also, what is the current (j804) behaviour when an in-place ammend fails?
Since there's only one operation, if it fails
The J exception handling is not used? If the input variables are
destroyed it could mean you are not able to recover? It is also a
complex behavior the programmer has to be aware of? /Erling
On 2016-10-04 04:21, bill lam wrote:
9!:53 [ 0 is the old (safe) behavior
9!:53 [ 2 is the new (p
20 matches
Mail list logo
