All programming languages can have their function definitions understood as a
template where "parameter variables" get substituted with their parameter
values when called.
in J, explicit verbs have x and y parameter variables, while tacit or built-in
verbs can/are documented as if x and y were
Note also here that replacing move with ,&< in the lfold sentences
would construct a sequence of boxes representing the argument pairs
being passed to 'move'
Or you could replace it with ; which might be even more illuminating
(here you would not get pairs from an rfold and instead the nesting
str
Pascal,
The most important thing I learned/remembered from your reply is that your
lfold is an adverb (that happens to be constructed from a pair of adverbs
in an adverb train).
That helped me understand that Raul's lfold is an adverb, too, but defined
explicitly, where yours is defined implicitly
To clarify,
A conjunction F.. in this case, is documented according to the same explicit
defintion: either 2 : 'u F.. v' or {{u F.. v}}
In the above explicit definitions u is left argument to F.. v is right
argument.
lfold is an adverb. Has just one left argument u. That adverb will place i
Damn.
On Tue, Dec 6, 2022 at 6:31 PM Henry Rich wrote:
> No, u is the left argument and v is the right. u@v for example.
>
> Henry Rich
>
>
>
--
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
No, u is the left argument and v is the right. u@v for example.
Henry Rich
On 12/6/2022 6:29 PM, Brian Schott wrote:
Raul,
I'm beginning to understand your explanation of lfold=: {{ ]F..(u~) }} .
You're saying that j conjunctions have a left and right argument we call v
and u, respectively
(
Raul,
I'm beginning to understand your explanation of lfold=: {{ ]F..(u~) }} .
You're saying that j conjunctions have a left and right argument we call v
and u, respectively
(from the perspective of the interpreter).
In that context, u is on the right of the conjunction, and that's why you
used u
Henry,
*Oh!*
The grey x and y's were so dim and small, I could not see them.
That explains a lot.
Thank you.
Now, I need to look again at Raul's explanation, which came in after yours.
On Tue, Dec 6, 2022 at 5:34 PM Henry Rich wrote:
> The initial value (x) and all subsequent results of v go in
Context is important here.
In
lfold=: {{ ]F..(u~) }}
The u for lfold is the v for F..
The J parser is not going to interpret u or v according to some
referenced definition -- it's going to interpret u or v according to
the definition it's currently interpreting.
The same holds for x and y.
The initial value (x) and all subsequent results of v go into the right
argument of v.
All I'm saying is that the picture is right.
Henry Rich
On 12/6/2022 5:32 PM, Brian Schott wrote:
So, is the picture signalling that v's left argument is y, and v's right
argument is x?
If so, that's what m
So, is the picture signalling that v's left argument is y, and v's right
argument is x?
If so, that's what makes no sense, to me.
Or are you saying I've got v and u backwards, like I claimed Raul does?
On Tue, Dec 6, 2022 at 5:26 PM Henry Rich wrote:
> The picture is up to date.
>
> Henry Rich
The picture is up to date.
Henry Rich
On 12/6/2022 5:24 PM, Brian Schott wrote:
Don't you mean v instead of u.
And even so, that may be the backward stuff that was discussed for a while
in the early Fold stages?
On Tue, Dec 6, 2022 at 5:21 PM Raul Miller wrote:
You should probably spend a f
Don't you mean v instead of u.
And even so, that may be the backward stuff that was discussed for a while
in the early Fold stages?
On Tue, Dec 6, 2022 at 5:21 PM Raul Miller wrote:
> You should probably spend a few minutes studying the diagram at
>
> https://code.jsoftware.com/wiki/Vocabulary/f
You should probably spend a few minutes studying the diagram at
https://code.jsoftware.com/wiki/Vocabulary/fcap#How_should_I_define_u_and_v.3F
The short form, however, might be summarized as:
lfold=: {{ ]F..(u~) }}
rfold=: {{ ]F.:(u~) }}
I hope this makes sense,
--
Raul
On Tue, Dec 6, 202
Raul,
That is extremely helpful. The main thing I get out of both of your
solutions, but most clearly out of the insert solution is that the argument
to be altered should be on the right side. For some reason, I have wanted
to reverse that. But your insert solution demonstrates that strongly.
Whe
P.S. I was going to mention, but I forgot: email managed to strip
trailing spaces from your message. This caused an error in the phrase
1 5 9&{;._2 top
One workaround here is to insert trailing spaces so that that phrase evaluates.
Another approach though would be to replace it with 1 5 9{];._2 t
I've not fully digested all of the fold rules yet, so I'll first focus
on building an insert version.
The key to using insert is building representing the expression which
would result from insert.
In other words, instead of
state tomove moves
+-+-++
|C|M|PDNZ|
+-+-++
We could look at
I have successfully solved Day 5 using the following looping verb `tomove`
but cannot craft a Fold version, and would like help.
*[FYI I have included an attachment that seems to load and execute
properly, but I could NOT get the email versions to load correctly,
presumably because of some funny c
18 matches
Mail list logo
