it's not a big deal.
a generic polymorphic replacement to @ is:
>: {{if. isNoun 'v' do. u n else. u@v end.}}3
4
1 >: 2 : 'if. isNoun ''v'' do. u n else. u@v end.' + 3
5
but I think forming trains in form of ([: u n) as an escape when using (`:6)
formation (more flexible than "real forks") would help more than domain error.
As example it is possible to do
ari =: 1 : 'if. isNoun ''u'' do. if. (isgerund -.@+. '''' -: ]) m do. m ar
else. m end. else.u ar end.'
isgerund =: 0:`(0 -.@e. 3 : ('a =. y (5!:0)';'1')"0)@.(0 < L.) :: 0:
ti =: ari ` ari NB. different from doubleadverb2.ijs: '' is passed to ` . boxed
non gerund is ar'd ie a:`u
F1 =: 1 : '(ti u) ti (''''ti) `:6'
doublesum =: + + F1 +
2 doublesum 3
10
3 + F1 1 NB. `:6 works nicely with m ti verb ti n invocation.
4
F1 is triple modifier that returns fork. (adverb that returns conjunction) if
u in conjunction return could be [: then u of adverb could be a monad, making
the modifier approach to forming trains that much more flexible.
2 3 +(/ F1) 1 2 3
3 4 5
4 5 6
On Tuesday, July 19, 2022 at 02:39:19 p.m. EDT, Henry Rich
<henryhr...@gmail.com> wrote:
[:y has the important function of signaling domain error.
Henry Rich
On 7/19/2022 2:35 PM, 'Pascal Jasmin' via Programming wrote:
> I'll add that the fairly recent change of u@n being a constant verb for n is
> very positive.
>
> Of the approaches I suggested for defining the adverb, the first I prefer.
>
> expecting an adverb to always return a verb is more user friendly than
> deciding for them.
>
> (>:@1) 3
>
> 2
>
> is good behaviour if the user passes 1 as adverb parameter to (>:@)
>
> 1 (>:@)
>
>> :@1
> Returning a constant verb when provided with a constant or "dynamic"
> ambivalent (monad+dyad flexibility) execution when provided with a verb is
> design that will result in fewer edge cases (bugs) when combined with other
> adverbs that expect, or more importantly, return verbs that tend to be
> expected by other modifiers.
>
> So. polymorphic return word types from a modifier are design deficient
> compared to single word types return. Especially considering that a constant
> verb provides a user intuitive way of obtaining the constant result with the
> flexibility of using any verb to create a word phrase that can be further
> processed by modifiers with fewer assumptions about word types.
>
> On a side note, if [:y returned y, there would be additional flexibility in
> constructing the polymorphic modifier in the form (where ti is ` but turns
> nouns into gerunds) of {{([: ti >: ti u)(`:6)}}
>
>
> On Tuesday, July 19, 2022 at 12:26:47 p.m. EDT, 'Pascal Jasmin' via
> Programming <programm...@jsoftware.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> some options,
>
> if you want your adverb to always produce a verb:
>
> 1 (>:@)
>
>> :@1
> 1 (>:@) 4
>
> 2 NB. increment on constant of 1 (u/m parameter)
>
> +: (>:@) 4
>
> 9 NB. increment after applying u (double) to y
>
>
> if you want "polymorphism" in your adverb to return noun result or verb
> depending on u or m,
>
>
> isNoun =: (0 = 4!:0 ::0:)@:<
>
> 1 {{if. isNoun 'u' do. >: m else. >:@u end.}}
>
> 2
>
> + {{if. isNoun 'u' do. >: m else. >:@u end.}}
>
>> :@+
> 2 + {{if. isNoun 'u' do. >: m else. >:@u end.}}3
>
> 6
>
>
>
> On Monday, July 18, 2022 at 04:03:40 a.m. EDT, Jacques Bailhache
> <jacques.bailha...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> I define an adverb which gives the successor of its argument :
>
> advsuc =: 1 : '>: u'
> 1 advsuc
> 2
>
> Then I define an adverb which applies its argument to 1 :
>
> applyto1 =: 1 : '1 u'
>
> Then I apply it to the adverbial successor :
>
> advsuc applyto1
> advsuc applyto1
>
> Why isn't it evaluated to 2 ?
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
--
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
https://www.avg.com
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
