Tom, It does look like a control structure if you are thinking of the explicit form of J.
In tacit J the same effect might be accomplished by using the agenda conjunction (@.) and specifying a gerund using tie (`) that would result in a different result. t=:]`($:@>:) @. (1 > ]) NB. increments until more than 1 then returns t 6 6 t 4 4 t 1 1 t _2 1 Not sure if I am addressing the question that you are raising but hopefully this helps Cheers, bob On 2012-10-18, at 8:51 AM, Tom Szczesny wrote: > Thank you for all your comments. They are very useful. > > Just for context for my initial question: > I am attempting to resolve: > https://github.com/kevinlawler/kona/issues/4 > and was hoping to see how J did it. > > However the approach in J is quite different than for A+ or K > in that "return." is a control structure in J. > > Tom > > On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 10:03 AM, Raul Miller <[email protected]> wrote: >> On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 7:57 AM, Ian Clark <[email protected]> wrote: >>> I was unfair about there being a dearth of task-oriented >>> documentation. >> >> Perhaps a better way of expressing this concept is that we have a wealth of >> unsupported possibilities, for task oriented documentation. >> >> I think that that was Iverson's goal -- he was building a language for >> expressing >> mathematical and other concepts in the context of computers. >> >> -- >> Raul >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> 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
