On Sat, Apr 2, 2022 at 10:32 AM Eric Iverson <[email protected]> wrote:
> I am quite sure that we will not revisit the decision on those primitives.
> They, and similar, are much better dealt with as library routines. and
> that is where effort should go. If they are worth having, then they warrant
> the effort of a library implementation.
I was not suggesting that we remove the library routines.
I was suggesting that the reinstated primitives call the library routines.
In other words, the d. implementation would look something like this
(notional, untested code):
DF2(jtddot) {
A ddotconj;
ASSERT(ddotconj=unquote(a,w,jtfindnameinscript(jt,"~addons/math/calculus/calculus.ijs","deriv_jcalculus_",CONJ),EVNONCE));
FAV(ddotconj)->lc=FAV(self)->id;
R ddotconj;
}
Thanks,
--
Raul
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
