Apologies re my earlier msg, below... it looks as if I’d inadvertently run two
jqt updates concurrently, so I expect there was some conflict. Anyway, jQt
seems to be ok.
Thanks,
Mike
Please reply to mike_liz@tiscali.co.uk.
Sent from my iPad
> On 24 Aug 2018, at 20:39, 'Mike Day' via
Thanks, Eric
Puzzlement rather than problem, I hope.
So I've just downloaded the new zip for windows 64, overwriting my
existing J807 files and folders.
Absent-mindedly I then opened JQt before updating JQt, realised I should
have done the latter, so
closed the JQt session, and then ran the
(BTW, without your excellent J for C Programmers, I wouldn’t even be trying.
Thank you.)
> On Aug 24, 2018, at 1:18 PM, Henry Rich wrote:
>
> Right, [x] meant (as Humpty said) an optional element. Since J defines a
> meaning for every ASCII graphic, this is hard to express in a J context.
>
Right, [x] meant (as Humpty said) an optional element. Since J defines
a meaning for every ASCII graphic, this is hard to express in a J context.
It turns out the implementation of ".@'name' is flawed: you can write
it, and execute it, but it gives an error if you display it. Fix in
process.
Yeah... english overloads word meanings (mostly resolved by context,
but we fall into habits and expect others to share those habits).
Anyways, here, [x] could have been a J phrase, but here it was
borrowing from syntax diagram summary spellings (where brackets
traditionally indicate an optional e
Re trying my own examples—
I’m not too proud to flaunt my ignorance:
foo=:[x] ".@'name' y
|domain error
| foo=:[x]".@'name'y
I long ago choose (probably foolishly) to not spend a lot of time trying to
understand tacit J. My rationale was that I would be unlikely to recover the
cycles los
Sort of?
It's an optional left argument that would be part of the larger J
expression if it was present?
(That phrase was intended to show how it's used...)
Stil, we should have more havbits of trying things out.
With that in mind:
example=: p:i.3
9 */@(".@'example') 8
30
*/@(".@'examp
Is it safe to understand that “[x]” indicates an optional left argument, and is
not part of a the J expression?
> On Aug 24, 2018, at 9:19 AM, Raul Miller wrote:
>
> Also, in this example, ‘name’ was meant to represent a pronoun.
>
> Thanks,
>
> —
> Raul
>
>> On Friday, August 24, 2018, Henr
Also, in this example, ‘name’ was meant to represent a pronoun.
Thanks,
—
Raul
On Friday, August 24, 2018, Henry Rich wrote:
> ".@'name' is a verb. In
>
> [x] ".@'name' y
>
> y (and x if given) are ignored, and the result is the value of (name) when
> the verb is executed.
>
> This is the same
".@'name' is a verb. In
[x] ".@'name' y
y (and x if given) are ignored, and the result is the value of (name)
when the verb is executed.
This is the same as it used to be, but is now faster.
Henry Rich
On 8/23/2018 10:22 PM, Brian Schott wrote:
Henry, I'm still a little lost.
Is the final
I put up notice of the 8.07 beta on the SIGAPL page: http://sigapl.org/.
On Thu, Aug 23, 2018 at 11:34 PM Devon McCormick wrote:
> It looks like the idea is to defer the evaluation of the name 'windowsize'
> until invocation of 'npixels'. So, for instance, if 'windowsize' were a
> global variab
It looks like the idea is to defer the evaluation of the name 'windowsize'
until invocation of 'npixels'. So, for instance, if 'windowsize' were a
global variable that was assigned dynamically - at runtime - 'npixels'
takes the current value of that noun at that time? OK, I'm not sure that
differ
Henry, I'm still a little lost.
Is the final `npixels` a (monadic, in this case) verb which will take a
noun argument,
or is the current value of windowsize that noun.
If the latter, and windowsize is that noun, then what is the value of y in
the original expression `[x] ".@'name' y`?
If the for
Often you need for a verb to refer to the value of a name when the noun
is executed, rather than when it is defined. So, rather than
npixels =: */ windowsize
which would just be a noun, you write
npixels =: 3 : '*/ windowsize'
to defer taking the value of (windowsize) until (npixels) is exec
Thank you for the reminder, I'll try to build raspberry binaries this weekend.
On Fri, Aug 24, 2018 at 9:22 AM Joey K Tuttle wrote:
>
> No trouble with installation in Mac OSX Mojave - lovely speedups from j806!
>
> No troubles with AVX and non-AVX in Linux systems (great speedups there too)
>
> A
No trouble with installation in Mac OSX Mojave - lovely speedups from j806!
No troubles with AVX and non-AVX in Linux systems (great speedups there too)
Assume there will be a build for beta-i on RaspberryPi (or just a final
release) - the current link gets beta-b
Thanks for all the great work
Henry,
What does this new feature mean/do? Could you give an example, please?
[x] ".@'name' y improved.
--
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
beta-i contains all the new JEngine features planned for the 8.07
release. You can look at the work done for 8.07 at
https://code.jsoftware.com/wiki/System/ReleaseNotes/J807 .
It's a pretty long list. Even if you are an old hand at J, you will
find that there are new ways to do some old thin
J807 beta-i is now available for window/linux/macos.
This is non-trivial, stable release. Please start using this as your base J
system as appropriate, Your feedback is welcome and important.
--
For information about J forums see
19 matches
Mail list logo
