Here’s a solution in simple J. The original request was for a tacit solution:
]A=: (+:`*:;i.5)
┌───────┬─────────┐
│┌──┬──┐│0 1 2 3 4│
││+:│*:││ │
│└──┴──┘│ │
└───────┴─────────┘
f=: 13 :'".(>0{>0{y),":i.$>1{y'
f A
0 2 4 6 8
Linda
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of 'Pascal Jasmin'
via Programming
Sent: Monday, February 2, 2015 1:23 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [Jprogramming] conjunction in tacit verb
a 3rd tacit (and some "almost tacit") version
anV =: <@:((,'0') ,&< ]) NB. your an
an =: 1 : '<@:((,''0'') ,&< ]) m' NB. as adverb
w =: @.0 2 NB. result of 0 2 agenda
c2da =: 1 : ( 'a =. (m ,'' u'') label_. 1 : (''u 1 :'' , quote a)') tie =.
'`'c2da
JVERSION
Engine: j701/2011-01-10/11:25
Library: 8.02.07
Qt IDE: 1.1.2/5.3.0
Platform: Win 64
1000 st every '+:*:(anV i.5) tie tie 0 2 agenda';'u +:`*:;i.5';'(+:`*: , ( anV
i.5) ) w';'(+:`*: , (i.5) an) w'
┌────────────────────────────────┬─────┬──────────┬─────────┐
│+:*:(anV i.5) tie tie 0 2 agenda│13696│3.08835e_5│0.422981 │
├────────────────────────────────┼─────┼──────────┼─────────┤
│u +:`*:;i.5 │6656 │1.64672e_5│0.109606 │
├────────────────────────────────┼─────┼──────────┼─────────┤
│(+:`*: , ( anV i.5) ) w │4608 │4.70272e_6│0.0216701│
├────────────────────────────────┼─────┼──────────┼─────────┤
│(+:`*: , (i.5) an) w │5888 │7.76736e_6│0.0457342│
└────────────────────────────────┴─────┴──────────┴─────────┘
________________________________
From: Jose Mario Quintana < <mailto:[email protected]>
[email protected]>
To: Programming forum < <mailto:[email protected]>
[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, February 1, 2015 11:16 PM
Subject: Re: [Jprogramming] conjunction in tacit verb
So far two main tacit solutions have been shown. The first, bending the
rules,
an=. <@:((,'0') ,&< ])
Cloak=. ((5!:1)@:<'Cloak')Cloak=. (0:`)(,^:)
train=. (Cloak <'`:')&6 NB. `:6 verbalized
( v=. <mailto:train@:(%7b.@:(0&(%7b::))> train@:({.@:(0&({::)) ; an@:>@:{:)
f. )
,^:(0:``:) <mailto:&6@:(%7b.@:(0&(%7b::))> &6@:({.@:(0&({::)) ; <@:((,'0') ,&<
])@:>@:{:)
The second, following the rules,
fe=: 13 : 0
'0:';<'@:';<((0;0){::y);<(,'"');<((,'0');1{::y);<((,'0');_)
)
( u=. ]^:] fe f. )
]^:] ('0:' ; [: < '@:' ; [: < ((0;0) {:: ]) ; [: < (,'"') ; [: <
(<(,'0');_) ;~ (,'0') ; 1 {:: ])
Let us compare them,
Y=. +:`*:;i.5
(u -: v) Y
1
sp=. 7!:5@:<
sp&> ;:'u v'
2432 1920
st=. (, */&.:>@:(1 2&{))@:(] ; 7!:2@:] ; 6!:2)
10000 st&> 'u Y' ; 'v Y'
┌───┬────┬──────────┬──────────┐
│u Y│2624│1.49229e_5│0.0391576 │
├───┼────┼──────────┼──────────┤
│v Y│1920│4.96943e_6│0.00954131│
└───┴────┴──────────┴──────────┘
By the way, Patriots 28 Seahawks 24, a fine example that bending the rules
pays off ;)
On Sun, Feb 1, 2015 at 4:07 PM, Jose Mario Quintana <
<mailto:[email protected]> [email protected]> wrote:
> "Or, you can use ]^:]"
>
> Sneaky? (See,
> <http://www.jsoftware.com/pipermail/programming/2013-January/031234.html>
> http://www.jsoftware.com/pipermail/programming/2013-January/031234.html
> and
> <http://www.jsoftware.com/pipermail/programming/2013-January/031236.html>
> http://www.jsoftware.com/pipermail/programming/2013-January/031236.html
> )
>
> "
> But maybe it's also easy enough to use J's parser and not bother with
> tacit for this kind of exercise?
> "
>
> Maybe, but the question that started this thread was,
> "Is it possible to define f tacitly?"
>
>
>
> On Sun, Feb 1, 2015 at 3:38 PM, Raul Miller < <mailto:[email protected]>
> [email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Or, you can use ]^:]
>>
>> It's not really that hard.
>>
>> <http://www.jsoftware.com/help/dictionary/d202n.htm>
>> http://www.jsoftware.com/help/dictionary/d202n.htm says:
>>
>> u^:( v1`v2)y ↔ u^:(v1 y) (v2 y)
>>
>> So let's make v1 be 0: and v2 be a data structure which represents our
>> entire calculation:
>>
>> ]^:] 0:`(+:@:(0 1 2 3 4"_))
>> 0 2 4 6 8
>>
>> Now all we need is a verb which transforms
>> (+:`*:;i.5)
>> to
>> 0:`(+:@:(0 1 2 3 4"_))
>>
>> It's straightfoward to do this explicitly.
>>
>> Let's define a test:
>>
>> ex=: +:`*:;i.5
>> assert 0:`(+:@:(0 1 2 3 4"_)) -: fe ex
>>
>> Now we just need to define fe so that the above script does not throw
>> an error. So take a look at what 0:`(+:@:(0 1 2 3 4"_)) looks like and
>> transcribe that to code:
>>
>> fe=:3 :0
>> '0:';<'@:';<((0;0){::y);<(,'"');<((,'0');1{::y);<((,'0');_)
>> )
>>
>> Testing:
>>
>> ]^:] fe ex
>> 0 2 4 6 8
>>
>> Now.. that expression for fe is messy, and a little tedious to write,
>> but if you don't mind a little bit of trial and error and
>> investigation while you work through whatever uncertainties you have
>> about what you are seeing, you can do it.
>>
>> And converting it to tacit can be done like this:
>>
>> fe=:13 :0
>> '0:';<'@:';<((0;0){::y);<(,'"');<((,'0');1{::y);<((,'0');_)
>> )
>>
>> (And then look at the definition of fe using linear representation.)
>>
>> Oh, but that's cheating!
>>
>> Um... why?
>>
>> It's not, not really. You learn from whatever interests you.
>>
>> That said, it *can* be an interesting exercise to construct sensibly
>> named concepts for building that kind of data structure.
>>
>> But maybe it's also easy enough to use J's parser and not bother with
>> tacit for this kind of exercise?
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> --
>> Raul
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Feb 1, 2015 at 3:09 PM, Jose Mario Quintana
>> < <mailto:[email protected]> [email protected]>
>> wrote:
>> > "
>> > The agenda trick doesn't quite solve the problem though due to train
>> > formation rules:
>> > "
>> >
>> > Actually, when evaluating atomic representations, gerunds, etc. whatever
>> > one can accomplish using train (`:6) one can accomplish it using agenda
>> > (@.) as well (and vice versa).
>> >
>> > JVERSION
>> > Installer: j602a_win.exe
>> > Engine: j701/2011-01-10/11:25
>> > Library: 6.02.023
>> >
>> > ( agenda=. Cloak <'@.' ) NB. @. verbalized
>> > ,^:(0:`@.)
>> >
>> > u=. agenda&0 <mailto:1@:(%7b.@:(0&(%7b::))> 1@:({.@:(0&({::)) ;
>> > an@:>@:{:) f.
>> > u (+:`*:;i.5)
>> > 0 2 4 6 8
>> >
>> > Alternatively,
>> >
>> > caravan=. agenda&0@:<
>> >
>> > u=. <mailto:caravan@:(%7b.@:(0&(%7b::))> caravan@:({.@:(0&({::)) ;
>> > an@:>@:{:) f.
>> > u (+:`*:;i.5)
>> > 0 2 4 6 8
>> >
>> > I find train more intuitive but agenda more suitable for heavy duty.
>> >
>> >
>> > On Fri, Jan 30, 2015 at 9:30 AM, Joe Bogner < <mailto:[email protected]>
>> > [email protected]>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> >> I hear a faint whisper calling me to this dark side...
>> >>
>> >> I have seen these posts[1] when I had just started using J and didn't
>> >> understand them. I went down the rabbit hole for a few hours this
>> >> morning
>> >>
>> >> The first post in the list was particularly enlightening
>> >>
>> >> NB. was gfy in Dan's post
>> >> an=. <@:((,'0') ,&< ])
>> >>
>> >> NB. 2 + i.5
>> >> ((an 2);'+';(an i. 5);'*:') @. (0 1 2)
>> >> 2 3 4 5 6
>> >>
>> >> NB. Let's square everything
>> >> ((an 2);'+';(an i. 5);'*:') @. (3 0 1 2)
>> >> 4 9 16 25 36
>> >>
>> >> NB. You can even see syntax errors, which can help debugging
>> >> ((an 2);'+';(an i. 5);'*:') @. (0 1 1 1)
>> >> |syntax error
>> >> | 2+++
>> >>
>> >> Let's get some more syntax errors:
>> >>
>> >> ((an 2);'+';(an i. 5);'*:') @. (3#(3 0 1 2))
>> >> |syntax error
>> >> | *:*:*:2 2 2+++0 1 2 3 4 0 1 2 3 4 0 1 2 3 4
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> NB. +: +: +: +: (2+i.5)
>> >> ((an 2);'+';(an i. 5);'+:') @. ((4#3),(0 1 2))
>> >> 32 48 64 80 96
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> NB. adverbs too
>> >> ('+';'/';(an i.5)) @. (0 1 2)
>> >> 10
>> >>
>> >> add1=.1&+
>> >> ((ar 'add1');(an (2 4 6))) @. (0 1)
>> >> 3 5 7
>> >>
>> >> And then coming back around to my original question:
>> >>
>> >> ((ar 'add1');'+:';(an (2 4 6))) @. (0 1 0 2)
>> >> 7 11 15
>> >>
>> >> versus this monstrosity (beware of linebreaks)
>> >> gapply=:([: >@:}. (([: }. >&{.) ; >@:{.@:>@:{. 128!:2
>> >> >@:}.)^:( <mailto:%7b.@:$@:%3e@:%7b.)> {.@:$@:>@:{.))
>> >>
>> >> gapply ('1&+';'+:';'1&+');(2 4 6)
>> >> 7 11 15
>> >>
>> >> The agenda trick doesn't quite solve the problem though due to train
>> >> formation rules:
>> >>
>> >> gapply ('1&+';'+:';'1&+';'1&+');(2 4 6)
>> >> 8 12 16
>> >>
>> >> ((ar 'add1');'+:';(an (2 4 6))) @. (0 1 0 0 2)
>> >> 9 13 17
>> >>
>> >> You train verb worked well though as an alternative
>> >>
>> >> Thank you!
>> >>
>> >> [1] -
>> >> <http://www.jsoftware.com/pipermail/programming/2013-March/031883.html>
>> >> http://www.jsoftware.com/pipermail/programming/2013-March/031883.html
>> >> [2] -
>> >>
>> <http://www.jsoftware.com/pipermail/programming/2013-January/031236.html>
>> http://www.jsoftware.com/pipermail/programming/2013-January/031236.html
>> >>
>> >> On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 5:55 PM, Jose Mario Quintana
>> >> < <mailto:[email protected]> [email protected]>
>> >> wrote:
>> >> > "Is it possible to define f tacitly?"
>> >> >
>> >> > J tacit programming is Turing complete; thus, any verb can be defined
>> >> > tacitly. It can be difficult sometimes but this case is easy... If
>> one
>> >> is
>> >> > prepared to venture to the dark side.
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > an=. <@:((,'0') ,&< ])
>> >> >
>> >> > NB. Dark side of the force...
>> >> >
>> >> > Cloak=. ((5!:1)@:<'Cloak')Cloak=. (0:`)(,^:)
>> >> > ( train=. (Cloak <'`:')&6 ) NB. `:6 verbalized
>> >> > ,^:(0:``:)&6
>> >> >
>> >> > v=. <mailto:train@:(%7b.@:(0&(%7b::))> train@:({.@:(0&({::)) ;
>> >> > an@:>@:{:) f.
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > v (+:`*:;i.5)
>> >> > 0 2 4 6 8
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 1:20 PM, Joe Bogner <
>> >> > <mailto:[email protected]> [email protected]>
>> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >> Is it possible to define f tacitly?
>> >> >>
>> >> >> f=: 3 : '( <mailto:%7b.@:%3e@:%7b.y)%60:0> {.@:>@:{.y)`:0 (>@:}.y)'
>> >> >> f (+:`*:;i.5)
>> >> >>
>> >> >> 0 2 4 6 8
>> >> >>
>> >> >> It's meant to take the first gerund from a box that contains a list
>> of
>> >> >> gerunds and data to operate on
>> >> >>
>> >> >> It's an odd circumstance that needed it. I could probably rework the
>> >> >> logic but now I'm curious if it can be done
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Some things I tried:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> a=:(+:`*:;i.5)
>> >> >>
>> >> >> f1=:{.@:>@:{.
>> >> >> f1 a
>> >> >> ┌──┐
>> >> >> │+:│
>> >> >> └──┘
>> >> >>
>> >> >> f2=:>@:}.
>> >> >> f2 a
>> >> >> 0 1 2 3 4
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Tried various version of combining f1 and f2 to no avail
>> >> >>
>> >> >> This works:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> g`:0 f2 a [ g=. f1 a
>> >> >> 0 2 4 6 8
>> >> >>
>> >> >> I'm thinking there might be a way to do it without the assignment?
>> >> >>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >> >> For information about J forums see
>> <http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm> http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
>> >> >
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >> > For information about J forums see
>> <http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm> http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
>> >> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >> For information about J forums see <http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm>
>> >> http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
>> >>
>> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>> > For information about J forums see <http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm>
>> > http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>> For information about J forums see <http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm>
>> http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
>>
>
>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see <http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm>
http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see <http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm>
http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
