That's what Dan Bron aptly called the Black Hole of J.
Henry Rich
On 12/25/2020 7:57 PM, Thomas Bulka wrote:
Hi xash,
if it goes on like this, I fear we might come to the conclusion that
the most simple way of doing it is:
Regards ;-)
Thomas
On 26 Dec 2020, at 1:44, xash wrote:
Even
Hi xash,
if it goes on like this, I fear we might come to the conclusion that the
most simple way of doing it is:
Regards ;-)
Thomas
On 26 Dec 2020, at 1:44, xash wrote:
Even simpler:
M e. V
:-)
--
For information ab
yes, but I wanted to at least keep some
remote connection to the original task:
“I now want to apply each element of V to the whole of M”
That’s what rank is for, and I think this is what
helps understand how to go about it in another situation.
So I directly translated “each element” into right
Even simpler:
M e. V
:-)
On Sat Dec 26, 2020 at 1:18 AM CET, Thomas Bulka wrote:
> Hi Hauke,
>
> thank you very much. This works perfectly. Looks, like I’ve been
> thinking to complicated, again...
>
> Regards,
>
> Thomas
>
>
> On 26 Dec 2020, at 0:58, Hauke Rehr wrote:
>
> > +/ M e."_ 0 V
> > d
Hi Hauke,
thank you very much. This works perfectly. Looks, like I’ve been
thinking to complicated, again...
Regards,
Thomas
On 26 Dec 2020, at 0:58, Hauke Rehr wrote:
+/ M e."_ 0 V
does the job
--
For information about
+/ M e."_ 0 V
does the job
Am 26.12.20 um 00:55 schrieb Thomas Bulka:
> Hello forum,
>
> currently I try to make use of the Fold family of primitives to achieve
> a rather simple (I think) task. However, I have not been able to reach
> the desired goal. This is, what I want to do:
>
> Suppose, I
Hello forum,
currently I try to make use of the Fold family of primitives to achieve
a rather simple (I think) task. However, I have not been able to reach
the desired goal. This is, what I want to do:
Suppose, I have some matrix M and some vector V:
M =: 3 4 $ 12?12
V =: 1 2 3
I now want t
I think >,{x would do the right thing.
Thanks,
--
Raul
On Fri, Dec 25, 2020 at 1:27 PM Devon McCormick wrote:
>
> > Henry's proposal doesn't work for larger list
> > $,/>{x
> > 12 5 3 5 4 4 8
> which looks like it does work since 14400 = */12 5 3 5 4 4 . It's the same
> number of items.
>
>
Devon, Henry,
Devon is right. Henry's proposal has all the answers I wanted. It's just in
a less-convenient form.
If I reshape Henry's proposal ,/>{x into a y x 8 matrix, it should be the
same as {>,{x
I just need to find y:
* ]x=.31 16 45;3 19 16 4;30 14 46 14 20;34; 41 39 23;30 9 36 9 32; 4
> Henry's proposal doesn't work for larger list
> $,/>{x
> 12 5 3 5 4 4 8
which looks like it does work since 14400 = */12 5 3 5 4 4 . It's the same
number of items.
On Sun, Dec 20, 2020 at 5:42 PM Skip Cave wrote:
> Trying larger lists:
>
> ]x=.31 16 45;3 19 16 4;30 14 46 14 20;34; 41 39 23;
10 matches
Mail list logo
