I wrote:
> I guess I’ll take your original and see if I can re-phrase it along these
> lines.
Oh, this case was particularly simple.
v 'Sneaky sneaky sneaky!'
S n e a k y s n e a k y s n e a k y !
S n e a k y s n e a k y s n e a k y
S n e a k y s n e a k y s n e a k
S n e a k y s n e a k y s n e a
S n e a k y s n e a k y s n e
S n e a k y s n e a k y s n
S n e a k y s n e a k y s
S n e a k y s n e a k y
S n e a k y s n e a k y
S n e a k y s n e a k
S n e a k y s n e a
S n e a k y s n e
S n e a k y s n
S n e a k y s
S n e a k y
S n e a k y
S n e a k
S n e a
S n e
S n
S
Raul wrote:
> v=: # {. (' ', _2 }. ])^:a:@#~&1j1
This is what I was implying with “bilateral” (aka dyadic) “bond” (aka &):
v=: # {. a: ' '&(, _2&}.) 1j1&#
Simple, clean, pretty. Sneaky as all get-out.
There’s only 3 conjunctions in the whole thing, and they’re all of the form
(n&v) . All composition is done via trains, instead of composition conjunctions
like @ or @: etc. No [ or ] either. J, the notation, is doing all the “work”.
-Dan
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
