> On Jul 3, 2020, at 4:42 PM, Piet de Jong <[email protected]> wrote: > > I’m probably misunderstanding the force of your example. > >> On 3 Jul 2020, at 11:47 am, Xiao-Yong Jin <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> >>> On Jul 2, 2020, at 3:18 PM, Piet de Jong <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> My issue is not with x and y insofar as (u F:. v) is concerned. I agree >>> it makes sense for x to be 'control information/initial condition' and y >>> the ’data’. >>> >>> My concern is with x and y insofar as v is concerned. Each item in y for >>> the verb (u F:. v) now becomes x for the verb v. So the data items y >>> become x’s from v’s point of view. >> >> It's consistent with the existing primitives. >> >> ]F.:(+([[[:echo;)'=';[;'+';]) i.4 >> ┌─┬─┬─┬─┬─┐ >> │5│=│2│+│3│ >> └─┴─┴─┴─┴─┘ >> ┌─┬─┬─┬─┬─┐ >> │6│=│1│+│5│ >> └─┴─┴─┴─┴─┘ >> ┌─┬─┬─┬─┬─┐ >> │6│=│0│+│6│ >> └─┴─┴─┴─┴─┘ >> 6 >> (+([[[:echo;)'=';[;'+';])/i.4 >> ┌─┬─┬─┬─┬─┐ >> │5│=│2│+│3│ >> └─┴─┴─┴─┴─┘ >> ┌─┬─┬─┬─┬─┐ >> │6│=│1│+│5│ >> └─┴─┴─┴─┴─┘ >> ┌─┬─┬─┬─┬─┐ >> │6│=│0│+│6│ >> └─┴─┴─┴─┴─┘ >> 6
You were complaining that v in (u F:. v) should be v~. I was trying to point out that (]F.:v) and (v/) are functionally the same and the v uses the same x and y. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
