m&v y ↔ m v yThis is the definition of bond (monadic)
u&v y ↔ u v y . This is the definition of compose (dyadic)
=&{: is the definition which I used earlier as =&{: B
I was told that I was using & dyadically so it was compose.
Here is a slight simplification:
'A B'=:3|L:0(([:mailto
Hi
Thanks lot.
The console mode by starting jconsole does work properly only for use text
type calculation.
But in my case I have already installed the Oracle the newest Java, that
does not support 32bit type.
Air13:~ kamakura$ java -version
java version "1.7.0_09"
Java(TM) SE Runtime Environmen
Now that I understand it better, here’s my simplified tree question:
'A B'=:3|L:0(([:mailto:programming-boun...@forums.jsoftware.com] On Behalf Of Linda Alvord
Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2012 3:28 AM
To: programm...@jsoftware.com
Subject: Re: [Jprogramming] stitching matrices
m&v y ↔ m v y
No. It produces the same answer, but you are stitching with 'tails'
instead of tails (from A) and heads (from B) as was original asked for.
> R.E.Boss
I want to stitch every row from A with all rows from B where ({:"1 A) equals
{."1 B and one of these columns is deleted.
On 24-10-12 09:2
Both of the definitions below are called monadic, because the verb v
and the verb u are executed monadically.
On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 3:27 AM, Linda Alvord wrote:
> m&v y ↔ m v yThis is the definition of bond (monadic)
>
> u&v y ↔ u v y . This is the definition of compose (dyadic)
>
>
--
(B
That's what I thought originally.
Linda
-Original Message-
From: programming-boun...@forums.jsoftware.com
[mailto:programming-boun...@forums.jsoftware.com] On Behalf Of Brian Schott
Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2012 5:48 AM
To: programm...@jsoftware.com
Subject: Re: [Jprogramming] stitch
Compare the diagrams for hook and capped fork at
http://www.jsoftware.com/docs/help701/dictionary/dictf.htm
Kip Murray
Sent from my iPad
On Oct 24, 2012, at 2:47 AM, "Linda Alvord" wrote:
> Now that I understand it better, here’s my simplified tree question:
>
> 'A B'=:3|L:0(([:
>f
>
Is there some data which will show that difference?
Linda'
-Original Message-
From: programming-boun...@forums.jsoftware.com
[mailto:programming-boun...@forums.jsoftware.com] On Behalf Of Aai
Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2012 3:52 AM
To: programm...@jsoftware.com
Subject: Re: [Jprogramm
What Brian is pointing out is that for the use case you're studying, both the
definitions you quoted are irrelevant.
Because your use of & appears in the left tine of a hook, it will be invoked
dyadically. That is, with two arguments: x and y . You need to look for
definitions of & which invol
What data will show that g is not a hook ?
Linda
-Original Message-
From: programming-boun...@forums.jsoftware.com
[mailto:programming-boun...@forums.jsoftware.com] On Behalf Of km
Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2012 8:50 AM
To:t d programm...@jsoftware.com
Subject: Re: [Jprogramming] st
It produces the same result because
({.={:)"1 B
1 1 1 1 1
On 24-10-12 14:52, Linda Alvord wrote:
Is there some data which will show that difference?
Linda'
-Original Message-
From: programming-boun...@forums.jsoftware.com
[mailto:programming-boun...@forums.jsoftware.com] On Beha
(Oh boy, something I know about: Java versions and variants. :-)
The "mixed mode" in the output of "java -version" means that the Java HotSpot
virtual machine runs Java code first by interpreting it, and then by compiling the Java code that
runs a lot (the hot spots). The variants are:
(1) th
Trying a resend:
On 10/24/2012 11:47 AM, km wrote:
Consider
f =: - %
g =: [ - %@]
f 2
1.5
g 2
1.5
3 f 2
2.5
3 g 2
2.5
Verbs f and g above cannot be distinguished by data -- given the same
input, they produce the same output. In mathematics they would be
considered to b
A search for trace.ijs plus experimentation led to
load '~addons/general/misc/trace.ijs'
f =: - %
g =: [ - %@]
NB. f and g are in base locale
trace 'f_base_ 2'
--- 0 Monad --
f_base_
2
--
- %
2
1.5
===
On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 3:27 AM, Linda Alvord wrote:
> m&v y ↔ m v yThis is the definition of bond (monadic)
>
> u&v y ↔ u v y . This is the definition of compose (dyadic)
>
>
> =&{: is the definition which I used earlier as =&{: B
>
> I was told that I was using & dyadically so it was com
I do not understand this question.
g is not a hook -- g is a train of three verbs while a hook is a train
of 2 verbsw -- why should we expect it to look like a hook?
--
Raul
On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 3:47 AM, Linda Alvord wrote:
> Now that I understand it better, here’s my simplified tree ques
The original A and B would show that difference.
--
Raul
On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 8:52 AM, Linda Alvord wrote:
> Is there some data which will show that difference?
>
> Linda'
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: programming-boun...@forums.jsoftware.com
> [mailto:programming-boun...@forums.
g itself will show this, when you display it.
Remember that "hook" is a grammatical description. So the easiest way
to determine the "hookness" of a bit of grammar is to look at the
grammar.
--
Raul
On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 9:00 AM, Linda Alvord wrote:
> What data will show that g is not a h
Ok... I'd do something like this:
NB. stand-ins -- please replace definitions
isLabel=: 'LA' e.~ {.
isFirst=: 'Attribute1' -: -.&' '
processBatch=: <
processItem=: <
NB. utility
bitshift=: |.!.0
((1 bitshift isFirst&>) processBatch@:(processItem/.~ [: +/\
isLabel&> );.1 ]) <;._2 d1
Note that
Hi
Once the newest 1.7 version is installed, it is difficult to start 32bit
mode. In my case the following messages are output:
Air13:~ kamakura$ java -d32 -version
Error: This Java instance does not support a 32-bit JVM.
Please install the desired version.
Toshinari Kamakura
2012/10/25 Peter
Spectacular!
I was curious what "nc" was, because *I* don't remember defining that verb. I
discovered
nc
4!:0
That is, nc is "pre-defined" as a name for 4!:0. 4!:0 is the foreign function verb that
returns the "class" of a boxed name as an integer.[1] Is there a list of pre-define
It looks like Oracle only distributes a 64-bit Java virtual machine for MacOS
X.[1] I know nothing about the technical or marketing reasons behind that
decision.
... peter
[1]
http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javase/downloads/jre7u9-downloads-1859586.html
Toshi
You say below:
"Anyways, I'm having a problem with "I was told that I was using & dyadically
so it was compose." because & in =&{: is compose but not because & was being
used dyadically."
Isn't =&{: B a case where & is compose, and the expression =&{: is
applied monadically to B ?
I a
23 matches
Mail list logo
