Hmm... ok, reviewing http://www.jsoftware.com/help/primer/frame_and_cell.htm 'frame' does get used that way.
I was thinking of the frame as having a shape rather than being the shape. Then again, since you can think of an array as being (for example) an (x,y,z) frame of cells, I do not think that my interpretation was entirely incorrect, either. So I suppose I have gotten myself into a "much ado about nothing" sort of issue. Thanks, -- Raul On Sun, Jan 17, 2016 at 6:00 PM, Henry Rich <[email protected]> wrote: > I disagree, on the grounds that the frame is a prefix of the shape; > therefore a list; therefore its shape is always a 1-atom list. The frame > can be empty, with shape (,0), but the shape of the frame cannot be empty. > > > Henry Rich > > > > Raul wrote: > > I think you meant your first sentence to be "It sounds like your > original confusion was between empty arguments (where the frame > contains 0) and a frame with an empty shape (which simply means that > the verb operates on a single cell)." > > Empty shape is very different from empty of values. > > But our tendencies towards verbal shorthands can mishandle this > "scalar" or "atomic" issue. > > Thanks, > > -- Raul On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 5:20 AM, Henry Rich <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> It sounds like your original confusion was between empty arguments (where >> the frame contains 0) and an empty frame (which simply means that the verb >> operates on a single cell). >> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
