Volkan Yazici wrote:
> Thanks so much for your interest.
You are very welcome.
> Below I tried to follow your explanations
> line by line.
You did so. The one thing I noticed you missed is that
in the final block the actual test and resulting
confirmation occur in the following two lines:
test y
1
> But I don't think you mean the actual words
> supplied in the word list. (See my post to
> Joey about my confusion of ;. operator.)
This does refer to actual words supplied in the word
list.
Cut (;.) is rather complex. It does not make for a
smooth starting point for the study of J. I recommend
not trying to learn how it specifies how the list of
characters is to be segregated into word-units, but
instead just learn *that* it is used, in this
instance, to cut the character list into a list of
words.
> First determining the missing letters in the
> symmetric words and trying to construct
> palindromes for those letters is a brilliant
> idea.
In the J wiki and J programming forum we often get to
see how Roger Hui approaches problems, and it is
consistently an educational pleasure.
> But I'm suspicious if it can be proved that this
> method results the shortest palindromic pangram.
It very likely will not result in the shortest
solution. Roger mentioned, at the end of the essay,
that he did not attempt to solve the problem of the
shortest solution.
I think the problem of shortest solution would be
naturally pursued by identifying palindromic
word-combinations that contain the highest
concentration of unique letters. That's easier said
than done: Examining even small combinations from such
a large set involves dauntingly large volumes of data.
Tracy Harms
____________________________________________________________________________________
Be a better friend, newshound, and
know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
