Looks like you could use another stage to clean up results?
1 {:: p. 1 2 1
_1 _1
p5 1 2 1
_1j1.54593e_9 _1j3.48012e_9
P.S. looking at the source, J is using Laguerre's method (so I'd use
p.. if I were re-implementing it in J).
Thanks,
--
Raul
On Sat, Mar 10, 2018 at 2:13 AM, 'Bo Jacob
Yes Raul.
I do not at all claim that (p5) is better that (p.).
Perhaps J should always display the same number of decimals for the real part
and the imaginary part of a complex number, such that the result would read
_1.0j0.0 _1.0j0.0
(%:i.2) is (0 1) , and (%:i.3) is (0 1 1.41421
I see what you mean.
But, as stated, this would bulk up the display unnecessarily.
You could probably add a rule for trimming zero digits, which might
make this palatable, but that would be something different.
--
Raul
On Sat, Mar 10, 2018 at 9:56 AM, 'Bo Jacoby' via Programming
wrote:
> Yes
Is there a standard verb for displaying arrays my way?---Bo.
Den 15:57 lørdag den 10. marts 2018 skrev 'Bo Jacoby' via Programming
:
Yes Raul.
I do not at all claim that (p5) is better that (p.).
Perhaps J should always display the same number of decimals for the real part
and the imagi
I think you would need to write it before anyone could consider it for
standardization.
--
Raul
On Sat, Mar 10, 2018 at 10:15 AM, 'Bo Jacoby' via Programming
wrote:
> Is there a standard verb for displaying arrays my way?---Bo.
>
> Den 15:57 lørdag den 10. marts 2018 skrev 'Bo Jacoby' via P
Something like this:
p5 0 1 2 3 4 5 0 NB. tiny imaginary part
0j_4.94066e_324 0.137832j_0.678154 _0.537832j0.358285 0.137832j0.678154
_0.537832j_0.358285
round=.(1e9*1j1*+/@:|)+]-1e9*1j1*+/@:|
round p5 0 1 2 3 4 5 0 NB. zero imaginary part
0 0.137832j_0.678154 _0.537832j0.358284 0.137832j0.67815
