Yep,

All the pieces fit, don't they. :-)

I guess that if you did want a fuzzy fit with a zero you could always establish 
the bounds through calculation and comparison. 
There really isn't a primitive that will do that.

Cheers, bob

On Nov 29, 2014, at 10:57 PM, Roger Hui <[email protected]> wrote:

> See
> http://www.jsoftware.com/jwiki/Essays/Tolerant_Comparison#Comparisons_with_0
> 
> On Sat, Nov 29, 2014 at 10:22 PM, robert therriault <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> 
>> It looks to me as if the fact that 0 is being compared is significant.
>> 
>>   0 (~:!.0) 1e_45
>> 1
>>   0 (~:) 1e_45
>> 1
>> 
>> I would expect the intolerant ~:!.0 to return 1, but the tolerant ~: to
>> return 0, except that I think that 0 may be multiplied by the default
>> tolerance to produce the intolerant fit of 0
>> 
>> You could also do a definition using match (-:) instead of not equal (~:)
>> 
>>   matchnotreal =. -.@-: +
>>   #I.0=(iscomplex=matchnotreal)1 j. -:^:a:1
>> 1
>> 
>> J can be so surprising.
>> 
>> Cheers, bob
>> 
>> On Nov 29, 2014, at 10:09 PM, Henry Rich <[email protected]> wrote:
>> 
>>> Yes, I believe it would.
>>> 
>>> Whether that's desirable is a different question.
>>> 
>>> Henry Rich
>> 
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>> 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

Reply via email to