You and I have different definitions of cheesy. Anyway, I wrote: > Here's a silly variation. > 3 ([ p:^:_1&|: p:\) i.7 > BTW, if the bug in [1] were fixed, we could've written: > 3 ([ p:^:_1 p:\) i.7
And if we fixed the bug and further extended the definition of p: in a consistent and compatible way, s.t. (-k)&p: ↔️ k&p:^:_1 for all k, then we could have: 3 (-@[ p: p:\) i.7 The cheesiest yet. But, returning to the actual interpreter, rather than ever more theoretical ones, today we can say: (3 */\ p:) i. 7 30 105 385 1001 2431 Which I think is actually a pretty way to describe the series. -Dan Please excuse typos; composed on a handheld device. > On Dec 7, 2013, at 8:15 PM, Raul Miller <[email protected]> wrote: > > If you want cheesier, you might try: > ps3p=: 30 105 385 1001 2431 4199 7429"1 > > -- > Raul > >> On Sat, Dec 7, 2013 at 5:22 PM, Dan Bron <[email protected]> wrote: >> I wrote: >>> Here's a silly variation. >>> 3 ([ p:^:_1&|: p:\) i.7 >> >> BTW, if the bug in [1] were fixed, we could've written: >> >> 3 ([ p:^:_1 p:\) i.7 >> >> Is there any nobler reason to improve the language than to make jokes even >> cheesier? >> >> -Dan >> >> [1] http://jsoftware.com/jwiki/System/Interpreter/Requests#rank_of_q:.5E:_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 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
