HaloO,
Darren Duncan wrote:
For other operators, non-assoc etc, the work will probably all have to
be linear. Eg difference|quotient|exponentiation.
That's why I would rename the left and right operator associativity
to left and right sequentiality. Note that there's a fundamental
difference
) =defn 1= 2 3 ^ 4 ^ , i.e., (2^3)^4
[^] (2 3 4) = defn 2= 2 3 4 ^^ , i.e., (2^(3^4))
Etc.
-
Hugh Miller
e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-Original Message-
From: Darren Duncan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, March 30, 2008 2:00 AM
To: p6l
Subject: Re: Query re: duction
:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, March 30, 2008 2:00 AM
To: p6l
Subject: Re: Query re: duction and precedence.
Mark J. Reed wrote:
You anticipated me. So, is there a core method for
foldl/foldr/inject/reduce, or do you have to roll your own as in p5?
On 3/29/08, Larry Wall [EMAIL PROTECTED
Mark J. Reed wrote:
You anticipated me. So, is there a core method for
foldl/foldr/inject/reduce, or do you have to roll your own as in p5?
On 3/29/08, Larry Wall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, Mar 29, 2008 at 10:18:53PM -0400, Mark J. Reed wrote:
: In general, is
:
: [op] (p1,p2,p3,p4...)
:
I'm a believer in generalizing where possible, modulo the principles
of KISS and YAGNI. The latter essentially means at least make it
general enough that you can extend it later without major retooling if
it turns out YNIAA.. It's pretty surprising what can turn out to be
useful, so I've never
Mark J. Reed wrote:
I'm a believer in generalizing where possible, modulo the principles
of KISS and YAGNI. The latter essentially means at least make it
general enough that you can extend it later without major retooling if
it turns out YNIAA.. It's pretty surprising what can turn out to be
On Sun, Mar 30, 2008 at 08:21:39AM -0700, Mark A. Biggar wrote:
The reduce meta-operator over - in APL gives alternating sum, similarly
alternating quotient for /, which only works if you right associate
things.
[-] 1,2,3,4,5,6 = 1-2+3-4+5-6 # pseudo-apl
[/] 1,2,3,4,5,6 =
On Sun, Mar 30, 2008 at 12:56 PM, Mark J. Reed [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm a believer in generalizing where possible, modulo the principles
of KISS and YAGNI. The latter essentially means at least make it
general enough that you can extend it later without major retooling if
it turns out
In general, is
[op] (p1,p2,p3,p4...)
expected to return the same result as
p1 op p2 op p3 op p4...
including precedence considerations?
That is, should
[**](2,3,4)
return 2^(3^4)=2^81, or (2^3)^4 = 4096?
--
Mark J. Reed [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sat, Mar 29, 2008 at 10:18:53PM -0400, Mark J. Reed wrote:
: In general, is
:
: [op] (p1,p2,p3,p4...)
:
: expected to return the same result as
:
: p1 op p2 op p3 op p4...
:
: including precedence considerations?
:
: That is, should
:
: [**](2,3,4)
:
: return 2^(3^4)=2^81, or (2^3)^4 =
You anticipated me. So, is there a core method for
foldl/foldr/inject/reduce, or do you have to roll your own as in p5?
On 3/29/08, Larry Wall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, Mar 29, 2008 at 10:18:53PM -0400, Mark J. Reed wrote:
: In general, is
:
: [op] (p1,p2,p3,p4...)
:
: expected to
11 matches
Mail list logo
