Sorry folks; A jforum interpretation doesn't necessarily address Mr. Graham's problem statement, vague as it was.
Why isn't the "solution" on Mr. Graham's site? Why do the solutions in the other languages look equivalent to &+ ? I'll admit I'm rusty on other languages, but I see no hint of an acccumulator state being kept anywhere. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ |\/| Randy A MacDonald | APL: If you can say it, it's done.. (ram) |/\| [EMAIL PROTECTED] | |\ | | The only real problem with APL is that BSc(Math) UNBF'83 | it is "still ahead of its time." Sapere Aude | - Morten Kromberg Natural Born APL'er | Demo website: http://156.34.80.240/ -----------------------------------------------------(INTP)----{ gnat }- ----- Original Message ----- From: "Chris Burke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "General forum" <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, December 11, 2006 6:05 PM Subject: Re: [Jgeneral] Paul Graham's Accumulator Challenge Again - a4 linesolution (help me make it 3 or less!) > ramacd wrote: > > The challenge seems to be here: > > > > http://www.paulgraham.com/accgen.html > > > > A quetion: why doesn't &+ satisfy the problem? The definition of function to > > a Lisp'ite is rather loose, no? > > This point is properly explained in the link already given, i.e. > http://www.jsoftware.com/jwiki/FrequentlyAskedQuestions/LexicalClosure . > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
