On 6/23/07, bill lam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Terrence Brannon wrote:
> (i. 2 3) + 7
> 7 8 9
> 10 11 12
> (i. 2 3) , 7
> 0 1 2
> 3 4 5
> 7 7 7
>
> the same rank arguments are here, but note the difference in shape of
> results.
I have a feeling that you are still held back by scalar (rank-0) thinking
Well I did my best to articulate my thinking via a dyadic verb
processing worksheet -
http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg03265.html
that you want to explain operation of verbs at scalar level.
well, I understand that at some point, you must consult the dictionary
instead of relying on the mechanical worksheet approach.
It's just when I tried to tighten up my worksheet a bit, Roger threw
me in the deep end with his executable agreement algorithm.
At this point, I decided to backtrack my way over to "Learning J" and
remain content with it accurate yet generalized examples.
--
J IRC Channel irc://irc.freenode.org/jsoftware
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
