Kip, This is impressive!
If I had ever learned how to write formal proofs, I think there must be one
lurking in here somewhere:
collatz =: ([:$: (] , -:@{:)`(] , 1 + 3 * {:)@.(2&|@{:))`]@.(1= {:)
Your definition (slight style modification)
Ckm=: ([:$: (] , [:-:{:)`(] , 1 + 3 * {:)@
J is at least pretty convincing:
((Ckm 325479) e.p0 360)#Ckm 325479
109 41 31 47 71 107 137 103 233 263 167 251 283 61 23 53 5 2
((Ckm 2357637391) e.p0 360)#Ckm 2357637391
31 47 71 107 137 103 233 263 167 251 283 61 23 53 5 2
$Ckm 2357637391
234
Sooner or later it will get to a p
In this case, it's doing this:
^ t.
%@!
the dictionary definition suggests that we should instead be getting
something like this:
%@! :(^ * %@!@])"0
I'm not sure, though, what good that extra complexity would achieve.
It's possible, for example, that that text for the dyadic case of a
taylor
^t.
%@!
*:t.
{&0 0 1 0x@(3&<.)
Raul,
Why are you expecting the more complex result from `^t.`?
And btw, the result from *: is striking to me because of the x in it. At first
I thought it was for the left argument, but the realized it is to force
precision.
---
(B=)
On Oct 29, 2012, at
Brian, a dictionary page for t.
http://www.jsoftware.com/help/dictionary/dtdotu.htm says:
x u t.y is the product of (x^y) and u t. y .
The complex verb in my previous email was built to satisfy this definition.
Does this make sense?
--
Raul
On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 10:09 AM, Brian Scho
Yes, it does make sense. My bad.
---
(B=)
On Oct 29, 2012, at 10:27 AM, Raul Miller wrote:
> Brian, a dictionary page for t.
> http://www.jsoftware.com/help/dictionary/dtdotu.htm says:
>
>x u t.y is the product of (x^y) and u t. y .
>
> The complex verb in my previous email was built
Which platform?
Last I checked we had a media/wav addon but it was built for windows
-- needed interest from *nix folk to do portability, or something.
--
Raul
On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 4:12 PM, Y-01 wrote:
> Hi, All
>
> Is there *lib.ijs for playing .WAV files? Or what is the most classical way
