According to https://www.jsoftware.com/help/dictionary/d620.htm :
x u@v y ↔ u x v y
But :
1 2 3 +/@* 4 5 6
4 10 18
+/ 1 2 3 * 4 5 6
32
Why does it give different results ?
--
For information about J forums see http://www.jsof
Hello Jaques
Use @: instead. It produces a verb with infinite rank.
1 2 3 +/@:* 4 5 6
32
Esa
On Mon, Jun 27, 2022 at 3:23 PM Jacques Bailhache <
jacques.bailha...@gmail.com> wrote:
> According to https://www.jsoftware.com/help/dictionary/d620.htm :
> x u@v y ↔ u x v y
> But :
>1 2 3 +
Hi Jacques,
I think this link might be very interesting:
https://code.jsoftware.com/wiki/Vocabulary/RankInfoIsImportant
Best regards,
Jan-Pieter
On Mon, 27 Jun 2022, 14:23 Jacques Bailhache,
wrote:
> According to https://www.jsoftware.com/help/dictionary/d620.htm :
> x u@v y ↔ u x v y
> But :
You have brought up a bug in dicitionary, that has survived to J6.02
@: has the correct analogous quoted linear definition.
the actual equivalence is
1 2 3 ([: +/ *)"* 4 5 6
4 10 18
or,
([: u v)"v
On Monday, June 27, 2022, 08:21:47 a.m. EDT, Jacques Bailhache
wrote:
According to h
On Mon, Jun 27, 2022 at 3:30 PM 'Pascal Jasmin' via Programming
wrote:
> You have brought up a bug in dicitionary, that has survived to J6.02
Is a characteristic a bug if it's by design?
The dictionary writeup on verbs --
https://www.jsoftware.com/help/dictionary/dictb.htm -- describes the
featu
I don't know if there is anything to be gained by rehashing this argument, as I
failed in the past, but I will try one more time:
The dictionary states that x u@v y may be substituted for u x v y. In fact, x
u@v y may not be freely substituted for u x v y, because there are cases where
such a
On Mon, Jun 27, 2022 at 5:31 PM Elijah Stone wrote:
> The dictionary states that x u@v y may be substituted for u x v y.
https://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Ajsoftware.com+inurl%3Ahelp+substituted+inurl%3Adictionary
does not find me that text.
My guess, though, is that you're referring to the
On Mon, 27 Jun 2022, Raul Miller wrote:
My guess, though, is that you're referring to the dictionary's use of the
symbol '↔'.
Yes.
as I understand it, this left-right arrow is used in math to symbolize "if
and only if"
The iff arrow uses two bars, cf ⟺ .
... But, here, it's worth noting
On Mon, Jun 27, 2022 at 5:58 PM Elijah Stone wrote:
> > as I understand it, this left-right arrow is used in math to symbolize "if
> > and only if"
>
> The iff arrow uses two bars, cf ⟺ .
>
>
> > ... But, here, it's worth noting that math relies heavily on contextual
> > constraints, and that we r
But ←→ is used in maths, too.
In the realm of logic, let φ and ψ be formulæ.
If φ ←→ ψ is a tautology (in semantic parlance “is always true”)
then φ and ψ may always be substituted for each other
regardless of “circumstances” or “surrounding constraints.”
So using that symbol (I don’t know to rep
On Mon, Jun 27, 2022 at 8:33 PM Hauke Rehr wrote:
> ¹ I could have copied it over from Pascal’s message but
>Raul already wilfully ignored that one
> (that’s my personal reading, and not meant as an offense:
>there can be good value in doing so, and I join that game)
I am not sure what
Another way to state the equivalence of @, in linear form rather than tacitly
u"v [x] v y
On Monday, June 27, 2022, 03:30:35 p.m. EDT, 'Pascal Jasmin' via Programming
wrote:
You have brought up a bug in dicitionary, that has survived to J6.02
@: has the correct analogous quoted line
On Mon, Jun 27, 2022 at 9:17 PM 'Pascal Jasmin' via Programming
wrote:
> Another way to state the equivalence of @, in linear form rather than tacitly
>
> u"v [x] v y
That's indeed a valid way of describing @
(That said: that format would become cumbersome for some other
primitives. The dictiona
That does not account for sequencing of side effects between invocations of u
and v. I like the nuvoc diagrams for this reason, even though they are a bit
confusing, as they afford proper deference to the role of each v-result. The
notion of 'output rank', while it cannot be part of the langua
On Mon, Jun 27, 2022 at 9:48 PM Elijah Stone wrote:
> That does not account for sequencing of side effects between invocations of u
> and v.
That's a good point, though I suppose that some might argue that this
is an implementation detail (a detail which has been stable throughout
the history of
u@v is u@:v"v. In other words, take every v-cell of x/y, and execute u@:v on
it. The order in which x/y are traversed is unspecified, it is true. But
invocations of u and v are interleaved with each other, which is clearly
different from u"v [x] v y, which executes v many times and than u man
On Mon, 27 Jun 2022, Elijah Stone wrote:
Doubly so if the output rank is variable and so padding is required.
output shape
--
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
On Mon, Jun 27, 2022 at 11:56 PM Elijah Stone wrote:
> Actually, I am realising now that u"v [x] v y is completely wrong. I
> mentioned 'output rank', but I was not paying sufficient attention.
Ugh... I overlooked that, also.
--
Raul
You are right. There are several places where the Dictionary is incorrect
or incomplete. To preserve the speed and style of the Dictionary, we
decided to leave it as is. NuVoc Is now the official definition of the
language.
Henry Rich
On Mon, Jun 27, 2022, 11:31 PM Elijah Stone wrote:
> I
19 matches
Mail list logo
