It would be reasonable to use fit to specify test-for-ordered: e.!.0 1
would say, 'exact, y is probably sorted' You would need a way to indicate tolerant comparison. Maybe e.!.__ 1 would say 'tolerant, default tolerance, y is probably sorted'. Better: any negative tolerance could call for default tolerance. You would want something the whole i. family could benefit from. Henry Rich Roger Hui wrote: > e signals error if the left argument has an > item larger than the largest item in the right: > > 1e9 2e9 e P > |index error: e > | 1000000000 2000000000 e P > > I wonder if the interpreter should look for > sorted y in x e. y as a special case. > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: John Randall <[email protected]> > Date: Wednesday, May 20, 2009 13:56 > Subject: [Jprogramming] Membership using interval index > To: Programming forum <[email protected]> > >> I have been trying to write a version of e. for sorted arrays, using >> I. , since it appears to offer performance benefits. My >> attempt is >> the verb e below: >> >> e=:[ = ] {~ I.~ >> >> time=:6!:2 >> P=:i.&.(p:^:_1) 1e6 >> >> 10 time '(i.1000) e P' >> 0.0001042 >> 10 time '(i.1000) e. P' >> 0.0069257 >> >> Is this a sensible approach, or are there better ways to do it? > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
