This is what Jx does which in most cases is what official j8xx interpreters do. You could find out what the latter interpreters illegally do after running the wicked tacit toolkit holding your nose if necessary.
[: + */ %/\ ]: ┌─┬──┬───┐ │+│*/│%/\│ └─┴──┴───┘ ": [: + */ %/\ ]: ┌─┬──┬───┐ │+│*/│%/\│ └─┴──┴───┘ Currently, (3!:1) [: + */ %/\ ]: |limit error | (3!:1)[:+*/%/\]: A nonce error would be better indicating that an implementation might, or might not, follow. Remember, verbs do not have to have full domains for the interpreters to be useful, for example, using j903, < $. (?. 3 4$2) * ?. 3 4$100 |nonce error | <$.(?.3 4$2)*?.3 4$100 > And, what about the case where the left argument to BV is a gerund > which represents an adverb or conjunction? + <adv ┌─┐ │+│ └─┘ 2 (>(+ <adv)) 3 5 (<,'/') <adv ┌───┐ │┌─┐│ ││/││ │└─┘│ └───┘ (>((<,'/') <adv)) ┌─┐ │/│ └─┘ (>((<,'/') <adv)) -: (<,'/') 1 On Thu, Dec 30, 2021 at 12:16 PM Raul Miller <[email protected]> wrote: > > Oops, almost forgot, some other cases to consider: > > ": on a boxed array which contains verbs -- does it respect 9!:3? > > 3!:1 on a boxed array which contains verbs -- how are verbs represented here? > > And, what about the case where the left argument to BV is a gerund > which represents an adverb or conjunction? (Or when 3!:2 or 15!:0 > produces a boxed adverb or conjunction?) > > Anyways... it's not that this is impossible, it's that it's currently > inadequately specified (and documented, etc.) for a variety of general > cases. > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
