your unwords is a noun and would need to be interpreted.
All I am saying here is that there is a tiny interpretive overhead to
executing
;: inv
Almost always, that doesn't matter. If you are trying to answer the
question 'what is the fastest way to perform ;:^:_1 on small arguments?'
you need to understand the details so that you can make sense of what
you see. If you are going to be executing it in a short loop, you might
also benefit from knowing the details.
Henry Rich
On 5/31/2022 10:57 AM, 'Pascal Jasmin' via General wrote:
inv NB. already defined.
^:(_1) NB. ^: instead of ^.
unwords =: ;: b. _1 NB. not sure if Henry saying this is more efficient. than
(;: inv)
unwords
}:@;@(,&' '&.>"1) :.;:
On Tuesday, May 31, 2022, 10:45:38 a.m. EDT, Don Guinn <[email protected]>
wrote:
Really interesting. So, I thought that maybe inv could be redefined as
(;:^._1).
But all I get is:
inv_z_=.(;:^._1)
|domain error
| inv_z_=.( ;:^._1)
t=:*(;:^._1)
|domain error
| t=:*( ;:^._1)
(;:^._1)
|domain error
| ( ;:^._1)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
--
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
https://www.avg.com
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
