Thanks. I can render it in pdflatex with the change you suggested. There is
no standalone class in my tex, so I also changed it to article in the first
line.

I can't tell which version of diagrams are better. If one doesn't
understand J concept of verb rank and assemble, all diagrams are confusing.
If one already understand, he can know what the diagram intended to show.

On Thu, Apr 2, 2020, 5:57 PM Hauke Rehr <[email protected]> wrote:

> It’s tex code, to be compiled with lualatex.
> You may use pdflatex instead but need to change
> the package “luainputenc” to “inputenc“.
>
>
> Am 02.04.20 um 05:54 schrieb 'Jim Russell' via Programming:
> > Sorry, how should I convert that into a viewable diagram.
> > Thanks!
> >
> >> On Apr 1, 2020, at 11:17 PM, Hauke Rehr <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>
> >> Actually, I’m a little bit confused as well:
> >> I thought I understood it but obviously didn’t
> >> so I tried redoing the diagram but with one
> >> set of arrows altered.
> >> Am I right these should be different or do I
> >> misinterprete the way atop is meant to work?
> >>
> >> thanks
> >>
> >> Am 29.03.20 um 03:36 schrieb ethiejiesa via Programming:
> >>> Raul Miller <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>>> Another possible way to emphasize what's going on here might be to
> >>>> split 'v' up into multiple instances (one for each cell) in the &
> >>>> case. (Though, there, drawing a box around the 'v' part, to show the
> >>>> scope of the verb and distinguish the definition from the application
> >>>> -- possibly even backed up by another sentence or something? -- might
> >>>> be even more important.)
> >>>>
> >>>> Thanks,
> >>> Perhaps the disagreement stems from difference in experience.
> >>> I sympathize with Sergey's confusion. When first coming to J a few
> months ago, I was confused by the exact same diagram. It only started
> making sense for me once the ideas of rank/splitting/reassembly and & vs @
> composition had already clicked.
> >>> So I feel like the diagram is a great illustration of the concepts but
> there is perhaps a need for some pedagogy that demonstrates the initial
> problem: What mechanical questions come up when trying to combine verbs?
> Which naturally leads to wanting the four composition primitives.
> >>> Is there a wiki page that already addresses this kind of thing? I
> might try writing one up and sharing it on Jgeneral anyway, in the off
> chance it fills a need.
> >>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>> For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
> >>
> >> --
> >> ----------------------
> >> mail written using NEO
> >> neo-layout.org
> >>
> <atampco.tex.txt>----------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
> >
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
> >
>
> --
> ----------------------
> mail written using NEO
> neo-layout.org
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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