I agree with Raul, monad = is a primitive that represents a thinking model inside human brain. It is just too resources consuming and should be used where special code is supported. +/@= #@= etc are candidates.
On Wed, Dec 7, 2022, 3:02 AM Raul Miller <rauldmil...@gmail.com> wrote: > I disagree with your implicit suggestion that #@= would lead to smelly > replacements for i.~ > > -- > Raul > > On Tue, Dec 6, 2022 at 1:54 PM Henry Rich <henryhr...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > = is unfortunately with us for keeps. It's used a lot to create > > identity matrices. > > > > I object to encouraging its use by having special code for #@= . I don't > > want people to think about (= y), ever. It raises a stench in the > > nostrils of the Almighty. I disown it. It's shunned. > > > > Henry Rich > > > > On 12/6/2022 1:40 PM, Raul Miller wrote: > > > Right -- my suggestion here would be that #@= would not produce the > > > result of = but would instead generate the counts directly without > > > generating the intermediate results. > > > > > > And yes i.~ and u/. give the same information more compactly, (but the > > > equivalent expression involving i.~ would be >./@i.~ which is harder > > > to read, so #@~. would be preferable). and u/. assumes that we are > > > using the bit vectors to compress an argument. > > > > > > Meanwhile, if you were to get rid of the monadic definition of = it > > > would make sense to give it the nub operation in its place, leaving ~. > > > in place (mapping it to CEQ instead of CNUB) for backwards > > > compatibility. I would be hesitant to take that step (at the very > > > least, I'd want to read through every published book on J to make sure > > > I hadn't overlooked something important. For example, are there > > > approaches to fractals where the current = monadic result is useful?) > > > > > > A general issue, in the context of the usefulness of primitives, is > > > that any single application domain is going to tend to emphasize a > > > handful of primitives, but an unrelated application domain would tend > > > to emphasize a different handful. > > > > > > Anyways, this doesn't have to go out immediately or anything, but the > > > argument that jtsclass() might be tossed is not necessarily an > > > argument against my suggestion. > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
