Thank you Jose,
Would you by any chance have figured out a way to make AR tacit?
*: AR is so much easier to "call"/type than ar '*:'
(`'') almost works, though "fails" with nouns, but is useful for an argument
that can be verb or gerund.
On Thursday, August 16, 2018, 7:48:47 p.m. EDT, Jose
One the one hand, I find your adverb neat and clever. On the other hand, I
like them beautiful and powerful. ;)
Powerful?
(9!:3) 5 2 NB. Box and linear representations...
o=. @:
c=. "_
ar=. 5!:1@:<
an=. <@:((,'0') ,&:< ])f. NB. Atomizing (monadic verb)
d=. (a0=. `'') (a
A simpler version of your usual adv definition, that seems pretty clean
(without my usual processing)
AR=: 1 : '5!:1 <''u'''
adv =: 1 : 'AR(u`)(`:6)'
1 2 3 *: adv
1 4 9
not sure if this works with all your utilities.
On Wednesday, August 15, 2018, 7:52:50 p.m. EDT, Jose Mario Quintana
I was wrong in my first attempt to generalise the problem. I’d said:
a + b * i, where a and b are integer scalars, and i is an integer vector,
i0,i1,i2...,
which is correct, but not sufficient.
The Quora problem also requires, or perhaps just implies, that i’s elements are
“proportional”
