Oh, that's the asymmetry of ; again! You'd have to use (<0;1;<a:) { i. 2 2 3
Henry Rich On 6/1/2012 2:38 AM, Steven Taylor wrote: > Thanks bob. That makes sense now. > > (<0;1;<<1) { i. 2 2 3 > 2 > (<0;1;<<1) { i. 2 2 3 > 3 5 > (<0;1;(0 2)) { i. 2 2 3 > 3 4 5 > (<0;1;(0 2)) { i. 2 2 3 > 3 5 > (<0;1;a:) { i. 2 2 3 > (nothing returned) > (<0;a:;1) { i. 2 2 3 > 1 4 > ... the only strange thing I guess is that > > (<0;1;a:) { i. 2 2 3 > is not equivilent to > (<0;1) { i. 2 2 3 > > thanks, > -Steven > > > > > On 1 June 2012 06:49, bob therriault<bobtherria...@mac.com> wrote: > >> Hi Steven, >> >> If we aren't at the outer limits, you can see them from here :) >> >> The different levels of boxing actually have different selection methods. >> The best explanation I have seen is Henry Rich's "J for C Programmers - >> Chapter 17" >> http://www.jsoftware.com/help/jforc/more_verbs_for_boxes.htm#_Toc191734399 >> >> Hope this helps. >> >> Cheers, bob >> >> On 2012-05-31, at 9:57 PM, Steven Taylor wrote: >> >>> This code gets everything except the 4th item at index 3. >>> >>> (<<<3){i. 10 >>> 0 1 2 4 5 6 7 8 9 >>> >>> Why is '3' boxed three times thought? >>> >>> Also interesting / puzzling (the trend is that more dimensions mean less >>> boxing is valid): >>> (<<<3){i.10 10 >>> Vs >>> (<<3){i.10 10 >>> >>> ... and >>> >>> (<3){i. 10 10 10 >>> >>> ... and >>> >>> (???){i. 10 10 10 N.B. are we at the outer limits now? >>> >>> thanks, >>> -Steven >>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> 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 > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm