Nope, ignore that simplification -- there was a reason I did it the other way.
Sorry about the noise. -- Raul On Wed, Dec 22, 2021 at 4:30 PM Raul Miller <[email protected]> wrote: > > Actually, looking at this, I am already seeing a simplification I > could have made: > > use=: {{ > depth=. +/\-/'[]'=/y > sel=. _1|.0 1 E.{~mask=.-.y e. '[,]' > vals=.".mask #inv mask#y > assert. (+/sel)=#vals > (sel#depth),:vals > }} > > -- > Raul > > On Wed, Dec 22, 2021 at 4:27 PM Raul Miller <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > My plan is to post about aoc18 in another 16 days (I am planning on > > spacing these posts out, one per day -- basically lagging the original > > puzzles each by 20 days). > > > > That said, I didn't use much boxing for aoc18. Maybe if I show the > > line parsing routine, that I used, it will give you a hint? > > > > use=: {{ > > depth=. +/\-/'[]'=/y > > sel=. _1|.' .'E.' .'{~mask=.-.y e. '[,]' > > vals=.".mask #inv mask#y > > assert. (+/sel)=#vals > > (sel#depth),:vals > > }} > > > > I hope this helps, > > > > -- > > Raul > > > > > > > > > > I hope this helps, > > > > > > -- > > Raul > > > > On Wed, Dec 22, 2021 at 3:59 PM 'Michael Day' via Programming > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > Apologies - more chat than programming, but: fwiw, for part 1, I just > > > defined simple > > > one-liner functions "forward" etc which worked ok. For part 2, they > > > needed redefining, and, > > > yes, I used direct defs; nothing as sophisticated as fold! > > > > > > I've done days 1-17, mostly straightforward, some very fiddly. > > > > > > But I'm stuck at 18, which is v complicated in its explanation. I > > > started with boxes in J, > > > but found navigation hard - I haven't used nested structures much in J - > > > so resorted to > > > working on the untranslated rows, using ;: to separate the symbols & > > > numbers, but > > > couldn't get all the examples to reproduce the stated results! So > > > I've wasted yet more time > > > learning - or relearning - how to deal with nested arrays in Dyalog APL > > > and remembering how > > > to use John Scholes' dfns. Managed to "reduce" the "addition" of the > > > first pair of snailnumbers, > > > but reducing the "addition" of the third line defeats me. I suppose I'm > > > sometimes inserting > > > some result at the wrong depth. > > > > > > I've spent so much time on that that I'll probably give up the rest! > > > > > > Cheers, > > > > > > Mike > > > > > > > > > On 22/12/2021 14:59, Raul Miller wrote: > > > > (responding to > > > > http://jsoftware.com/pipermail/programming/2021-December/059436.html#) > > > > > > > > I am not sure that I thought this example out well enough for it to be > > > > good on an examples page. > > > > > > > > For instance, after thinking about it for just a few minutes, I > > > > realized that > > > > > > > > b2fold=: 0 0 0&(}.F..{{ > > > > 'dH0 dA0 N'=. x > > > > 'A H D'=. y > > > > dA=: N*dA0 > > > > dH=: N*dH0 > > > > dD=: A*dH > > > > y+dA,dH,dD > > > > }}) > > > > > > > > b2=: {{*/b2fold y}} > > > > > > > > would have been clearer. > > > > > > > > (Originally I was using ]F.. and commenting that I needed to drop the > > > > first item of the result. But isn't it clearer to include that drop > > > > mechanism with the fold implementation?) > > > > > > > > But (and this is worse): this particular example lacks utility, which > > > > means that it's not going to be very interesting for anyone. > > > > > > > > Other opportunities will arise, though. And I think that your concept > > > > of linked example pages is a good one and worth following up on. > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. > > > https://www.avast.com/antivirus > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
