Re: [Jprogramming] Fractional parts

In easy steps (and for further reference) ... From these test data (two floats, two integers, different signs), to get the fractional parts v=. 2.25 _8.11 16 _3 simply taking the Residue (when dividing by 1) doesn't work (error at negative float position) 1|v 0.25 0.89 0 0 So first

Re: [Jprogramming] Fractional parts

1&|  works perfectly Den 9:19 søndag den 6. august 2017 skrev Martin Kreuzer : In easy steps (and for further reference) ... From these test data (two floats, two integers, different signs), to get the fractional parts     v=. 2.25 _8.11 16 _3 simply taking

Re: [Jprogramming] Fractional parts

1&| does work, actually. And, if you want an offset of -1 on that result when the original value was negative, you can use (1&| - 0&>) Thanks, -- Raul On Sun, Aug 6, 2017 at 3:19 AM, Martin Kreuzer wrote: > In easy steps (and for further reference) ... > > From these

Re: [Jprogramming] Fractional parts

All, Thanks for the help. Here's some real numbers from a problem I'm working on: Calculate some values from this equation: v=:2%(3r19-%1 2 3 245 246 247 248) v _2.375 _5.84615 _11.4 13.0028 13.0014 13 12.9986 Raul's first suggestion: 1|v 0.625 0.153846 0.6 0.0027933 0.00139082 0

Re: [Jprogramming] Fractional parts

ip would be best implemented as ip=: * * <.@| as it would return an integer result. Louis > On 06 Aug 2017, at 12:17, Skip Cave wrote: > > All, Thanks for the help. > > Here's some real numbers from a problem I'm working on: > Calculate some values from this

Re: [Jprogramming] Jx version 1.0 release

" On my wish list would be something similar for the “each" adverb. While writing tacit code I very often find myself writing u@(0{::]) ; v@:(1{::]) etc. " Louis, I find the points you raised very interesting and they might influence Jx v1.1. Meanwhile, if you really very often would

Re: [Jprogramming] Boxed verbs as alternate gerunds

There is no need for a new fill element, since the type could not be seen naked. Thus, the only fill which is needed to represent the proposed uses of this type is ace. It does, however, need a display representation, since you can format the containing box. Note also that the 5!: series of

Re: [Jprogramming] Boxed verbs as alternate gerunds

I am not sure if I understand your question. If you asked something undefined is a gerund or not. I checked by executing v@.0 '' and the J interpreter said value error. Sounds like an empty array joke to me. Sent from my iPhone On 7 Aug, 2017, at 5:23 AM, Jose Mario Quintana

Re: [Jprogramming] Boxed verbs as alternate gerunds

Coming late because of no internet. The proposal is for a new noun type that contains a verb but not an AR, as the current gerund does, right? You can't unbox it, because that would produce an illegal result. This is mainly a performance improvement, right? The AR is not an internal

Re: [Jprogramming] Boxed verbs as alternate gerunds

I am not hoping to change people's minds; nevertheless, I would like to explain, to some degree, my rationale regarding my current notion of what a gerund is. The Dictionary is famous (or infamous according to some?) for its terseness. It is not really surprising to me that different people have

Re: [Jprogramming] Jx version 1.0 release

temp=: 2 : 0 [: (v^:_1@(4 : 'y`:6 >x')"0 m $~ $) <@v ) atop=: 2 : 'm temp (v :. ])' under=: 2 : 0 m temp v : ([: (v^:_1@(4 : 'y`:6&>/x')"0 m $~ $) ,&<) ) compose=: 2 : 'm under (v :. ])' rank=: 2 : 'm atop (]"n)' ‘rank’ is “ as Henry suggested for gerunds, and I propose