Well, it's fixed for the next maintenance release of 9.02 as well, but I
don't know when that will be.
Henry Rich
On 2/15/2021 1:31 PM, 'Michael Day' via Programming wrote:
"Fixed for the next beta" suggests you might have overlooked that this
problem seems to occur in J9.02 as well.
Apologie
"Fixed for the next beta" suggests you might have overlooked that this
problem seems to occur in J9.02 as well.
Apologies if I'm wrong.
Cheers,
Mike
On 15/02/2021 17:16, Henry Rich wrote:
It comes down to this:
<. 17575011601890. 0 NB. bug!
17575011601891 0
<. 17575011601890.
175750
It comes down to this:
<. 17575011601890. 0 NB. bug!
17575011601891 0
<. 17575011601890.
17575011601890
When I rewrote >. to allow inplace operation, I forgot that comparison
tolerance causes trouble when the numbers get big. Singletons follow a
different path.
Fixed for next beta.
Dear all,
I had an issue when calculating the triangular number with the formula
<.@:-:@:(*
>:) in list context. Starting from 5928745 the outcome in list context is
larger than the correct value (additionally calculated with the binomial
coefficient in the first box):
t=: <.@:-:@:(* >:)
((2
