Note that you can skip the issue with the padded zeros by processing
through to a regular structure at the first "1
([: +/ ~.)"1 |: ar
or using atop
+/@~."1 |: ar
On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 12:56 PM, Linda Alvord wrote:
> (+/"1) 0~: (~.)"1 |:
--
ginal Message-
From: programming-boun...@forums.jsoftware.com
[mailto:programming-boun...@forums.jsoftware.com] On Behalf Of Dan Bron
Sent: Monday, November 26, 2012 12:59 PM
To: J Programming
Subject: Re: [Jprogramming] Fwd: Boxing by columns
Have you tried ('';1) <;.1 table?
Cut is
Have you tried ('';1) <;.1 table?
Cut is one of the few primitives which can directly address non-leading
dimensions.
-Dan
Please excuse typos; composed on a handheld device.
On Nov 25, 2012, at 8:05 PM, Nick Simicich wrote:
> I am trying to use the new gmail - and I have no idea why this p
Personally, I always try to avoid boxing whenever I can.
And if your data is regular (if all boxes have the same shape) then it
seems to me that boxing is needless overhead.
Am I missing something here?
Thanks,
--
Raul
--
For
In general I agree with Don that perhaps there are better ways to get the
end result.
However I did have a play and came up with the following way to box the
columns of a table that is about twice as fast and twice as lean as the
transpose method.
ab=: >: ?. 1e6 4 $ 9
$ab
100 4
10 ti
I don't think that there is a way to box by column other than transposing.
However, it is not really necessary to box each column (or row if you
transpose) to get your desired answer, which I assume is that you are
looking for columns containing 9 unique digits. All you really need it the
count of
I am trying to use the new gmail - and I have no idea why this partial
message was sent prematurely. I apologize, please ignore the earlier
version.
-- Forwarded message --
From: Nick Simicich
Date: Sun, Nov 25, 2012 at 4:24 PM
Subject: Boxing by columns
To: Programming forum
