The J code on SO for odd numbers is missing the ">"
This is what is posted on SO:
c=:*:({&' *'@],&":2%(%+/@,))] (|@j./~2&|#])@i:@<:
c 13
|index error: c
This is what it should be:
c=:*:({&' *'@],&":2%(%+/@,))]>(|@j./~2&|#])@i:@<:
Skip
On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 9:13 PM, Marshall Lochbaum wrote:
Noticed the same thing. I've updated the answer on SO to reflect the shortest
standard solution (45 chars), the generalized solution (49 chars), and added a
link to this thread.
I also note that the 2* in 2*+/ is a bit redundant with the _2 in _2 {.\ : if
we applied the +/ to the unfiltered
You could replace *:@# with #*#
That's all I can see at the moment.
FYI,
--
Raul
On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 10:13 PM, Marshall Lochbaum
wrote:
> I don't have an SO account, so go ahead and post that. While I'm at it,
> I shaved a character off the original by noting that the length of the
> circ
I don't have an SO account, so go ahead and post that. While I'm at it,
I shaved a character off the original by noting that the length of the
circle is half the diameter for even lengths. This doesn't hold for odd
lengths, so it won't help there.
c=:({&' *',&":2*+/@,%*:@#)@:>_2{.\|@j./~@i:@<:
Ma
Oh! Nice. If you have an account on SO feel free to post it, I'll vote it
up past my original. If you don't, I'll replace mine with yours and link to
your message on the Forum.
-Dan
-Original Message-
From: programming-boun...@forums.jsoftware.com
[mailto:programming-boun...@forums.jsoft
I haven't been able to shorten your code. But here's a version which
handles odd numbers, at the cost of only two characters:
c=:*:({&' *'@],&":2%(%+/@,))]>(|@j./~2&|#])@i:@<:
Rather than filtering by position (_2{.\]), we filter the x values by
oddness (2&|#]).
Marshall
On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at
There's a code golf challenge on StackOverflow [1] which asks us to generate
an approximation of a circle in ASCII (i.e. using integral Cartesian
coordinates) and a corresponding estimation of pi.
For example, the 8th order circle in ASCII has 15 rows and 8 columns and
gives an approximate value o
http://www.jsoftware.com/pipermail/general/2006-January/026271.html
On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 7:00 AM, Raul Miller wrote:
> If I recall correctly (and a quick search isn't finding me anything,
> but we've discussed this previously in this forum), hooks were a
> mistake - they were unnecessary cute
III. Definitions ( http://www.jsoftware.com/help/dictionary/dict3.htm )
explains the rank information shown in the vocabulary entries for verbs.
Most of the other entries also have what it seems to be the rank
information of verbs that they produce. The following are just a few
related questions:
If I recall correctly (and a quick search isn't finding me anything,
but we've discussed this previously in this forum), hooks were a
mistake - they were unnecessary cuteness. But, now that we have them,
we can't get rid of them - it would break too many things.
That said, here's the dictionary pa
Thank you.
I had tried to do something similar, but I couldn't come up with a decent
ambivalent verb to use.
Now for the big question. Even-numbered and odd-numbered dyadic trains behave
very differently. Is there a purpose behind this difference? Or is it just a
product of the other rules?
I
11 matches
Mail list logo
