On Wed, Oct 8, 2008 at 4:40 PM, Sherlock, Ric <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Nevertheless I'm inclined towards the amend method for its conciseness
> and because in my mind it mirrors the crossing over process better.
Personally, I would use a different numeric approach, and I would
be inclined to give it a name:
old=: i.5000 4000
new=: -old
loc=: 0.7 > ($old)[EMAIL PROTECTED]
upd=: 1 :(':';'y + m*x-y')
ts=:6!:2,7!:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
10 ts'(old&*@:-. + new&* ) loc'
0.475871 4.02655e8
10 ts'loc}old,:new'
0.575763 6.7109e8
10 ts'new loc upd old'
0.430165 4.02656e8
(new loc upd old) -: loc}old,:new
1
The expression old + loc * new-old isn't that complicated,
but perhaps Roger will modify the interpreter's treatment
of loc}old,:new to avoid having to buld old,:new?
--
Raul
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
