No, &: works properly. That note is just saying that monadic &: may not
be as fast as monadic @: because some special forms containing @: are
not recognized for &: .
You are using &: dyadically. You ended up executing
0 (1&Z: ] ]) 1
but 0 (1&Z:) 1 executes 1&Z: 0 times (see
https://code.js
The bugs are yours.
Thank you!
In your second bug, you are not executing 1&Z: . You should have @: not &: .
Does &: not work because of this?
https://code.jsoftware.com/wiki/Vocabulary/ampco
The monadic use of &: is deprecated. Use @: instead.
Some compounds of the form f&:g are not recogn
Thanks, Henry, for reminding me that it's in a script.
Given that observation, the timing is pretty impressive!
Cheers,
Mike
On 16/01/2020 15:40, Henry Rich wrote:
Your point about the order of x and y is reasonable. If you are
thinking of F:. as a variant of u/ the order makes sense. I wi
Your point about the order of x and y is reasonable. If you are
thinking of F:. as a variant of u/ the order makes sense. I will think
about it, and would really like to hear considered opinion from other users.
The bugs are yours.
0 *:@[ F:. ((] [ 1&Z:)&:(25&=)) 3 1 4 6 5 7 8 9
0 0 0 0 1
On Thu, Jan 16, 2020 at 4:23 AM 'Sergey Kamenev' via Programming
wrote:
> But this is waste computations.
Conservation of resources, to be useful, should be applied at the
resource bottlenecks. Otherwise the conservation efforts tend to make
the problem(s) worse.
Conservation also tends to force
Early days - I haven't studied the Fold family yet, but just applying
your example
worries me a bit if the following is typical:
q =: i. 100
ts
6!:2 , 7!:2@]
NB. compare naive (! - ie"old" J) and Fold method to locate match -
might be near end of array:
r[echo ts'r =: 0 *:@[ F
I believe that i. stops at the first match. So this should work.
({.~0 i.~])4 3 2 8 0 9 1
4 3 2 8
Yes. But in my case I finding result of function.
And your decision requires to apply function to all elements source array.
Sergey
-
16.01.2020 0:42, Henry Rich:
0 *:@[ F:. ([ (1 Z: 25&=)) 3 1 4 6 5 7 8 9
9 1 16 36 25
Suggestion for improving Fold are welcomed.
Great! Thank you for your hard work!
You are using trick with postfiltering output result
1. I found the bug:
0 *:@[ F:. (] [ 1&Z:)&:(25&=) 3 1 4 6 5 7 8 9
0
0 *:@[ F:. ([ (1 Z: 25&=)) 3 1 4 6 5 7 8 9
9 1 16 36 25
Suggestion for improving Fold are welcomed.
Henry Rich
On 1/15/2020 2:58 PM, 'Sergey Kamenev' via Programming wrote:
Hi!
I need test function f on array x1 x2 ... xn
If f(x) = 0 then no need test another member of array.
I don't und
I believe that i. stops at the first match. So this should work.
({.~0 i.~])4 3 2 8 0 9 1
4 3 2 8
On Wed, Jan 15, 2020, 2:08 PM Julian Fondren
wrote:
> On Wed, 2020-01-15 at 22:58 +0300, 'Sergey Kamenev' via Programming
> wrote:
> > Hi!
> >
> > I need test function f on array x1 x2 ... xn
>
On Wed, 2020-01-15 at 22:58 +0300, 'Sergey Kamenev' via Programming
wrote:
> Hi!
>
> I need test function f on array x1 x2 ... xn
>
> If f(x) = 0 then no need test another member of array.
So, you want the member of an array that passes a test, and you don't
want to apply the test to the entire
11 matches
Mail list logo
