I believe this is what Pascal is trying to demonstrate (correct me if I
am wrong):
0 (1 : '/') \
/\
0 ((1 : '/') \)
|syntax error
| 0((1 :'/')\)
A sequence of adverb applications when the first application returns an
adverb is okay (it produces the adverb train), however, applied as a
train of adverbs, which one might expect to behave the same, it is a
syntax error.
I think it's confusing because
X (a0 a1)
in this case is not the same as
(X a0) a1
On 03/13/2016 10:32 AM, Raul Miller wrote:
As you point out, this works:
+ - (1 : '`u') `:6
+ -
If we fully parenthesize that expression, it looks like this:
require 'trace'
paren '+ - (1 : ''`u'') `:6'
((+ (- (1 : '`u'))) `: 6)
So when you put parenthesis around (1 : '`u') `:6 you break the expression.
And, as an aside, your original expression did not actually need any
parenthesis:
+ - 1 : '`u' `:6
+ -
Thanks,
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
