Yes, well...
Consider this sequence:
7541 5333 3377 11993 20
Thanks,
—
Raul
On Wednesday, August 15, 2018, Jose Mario Quintana <
jose.mario.quint...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I do not see any attempt in the question at generalizing—so technically
> the
> > answer would be a number.
>
> In addit
There are two ways, to produce tacitly what you want: the easy (at least
for me) wicked way and the hard orthodox way. Life is short; so, I will
only show the former. Raul already commented on this method and it
involves cloaking adverbs and conjunctions as monadic and dyadic verbs,
respectively.
> Sorry for the confusion,
I was also confused by the description of the problem (as is implied in my
first post to this thread).
:)
On Wed, Aug 15, 2018 at 6:12 AM, 'Mike Day' via Programming <
programm...@jsoftware.com> wrote:
> Yes, I think it was ok to generalise, but I’d missed what the
> I do not see any attempt in the question at generalizing—so technically
the
> answer would be a number.
In addition, that number presumably should be a function of the four
numbers; as far as I can see, that function can be defined as the verb,
v=. (-/ .* % -/ .+)@:(2 2&$)
So,
v 21 38 5
If I understand you correctly, your "adverb" (2j3) is a noun.
I'm thinking of an actual adverb.
On Thu, Aug 16, 2018 at 4:25 AM, Don Guinn wrote:
> Don't need to mess with tie.
>
>
> v1=:+
>
> v2=:-
>
> v3=:%
>
> av=:2j3
>
> (v1,v2,v3)av
>
> 2j_3 _2j_3 0.153846j_0.230769
>
> (v1;v2;v3)av
>
> +--
my utilities, as double adverbs (sorry I guess). Lot of code that mostly deals
with flexible transforms of inputs.
strinsert =: 1 : ' [ , u , ]'
quote =: &,@(,&)@(#~ >:@(=&))daF =: 1 : 'a =. (''2 : '', (quote m)
, '' u'') label_. 1 : (''u 1 :'' , quote a)'
daF =: 1 : 'a =. (''2 :
Don't need to mess with tie.
v1=:+
v2=:-
v3=:%
av=:2j3
(v1,v2,v3)av
2j_3 _2j_3 0.153846j_0.230769
(v1;v2;v3)av
++-+--+
|2j_3|_2j_3|0.153846j_0.230769|
++-+--+
On Wed, Aug 15, 2018 at 11:05 AM pietdion wrote:
> Thanks for your answer.
Thanks for your answer. But I can't understand it.
Here is what I want to do.
I have an adverb called av say.
Also have verbs say v1, v2, v3.
Then I want the verb
v=. (v1 av) , (v2 av) , (v3 av)
Of course I can write it out as in the last sentence above, but I was
hoping to be able just to def
Generally speaking, its a good idea to include an illustrative use
case with a specification, so let's make up one:
Let's say my keyboard is getting worn out, and I have to hit the ` key
an arbitrary number of times before it works. So I want to be able to
form gerunds without using that key.
So,
Yes, I think it was ok to generalise, but I’d missed what they meant by
proportionality.
So, if I define a different quadruplet,
q=: 6 + 7*1 2 5 10
where 1:2 = 5:10, Jose’s function works fine:
(-/ .* % -/ .+)@:(2 2&$) q
6
which is the required offset.
fwiw,
dgcd q. NB. gcd o
Maybe already answered elsewhere and/or an ignorant question.
But can’t figure it out.
Is there a (tacit) way to apply an adverb to each of a list of verbs?
--
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.ht
11 matches
Mail list logo
