Hi Alex,
Just saw this thread (and the previous ones) ... unfortunately I'm at home
right now and the machine here is configured for gaming so theres no
development tools whatsoever installed. I'll be back in the office tomorrow
though and will give your problem a run through.
The only
I'm not very experienced in using Foreign Conjunctions. Therefore I can't
see what the length error causes.
NB.---Test No. 1
--
sg
0
(10 15 15 10
The data to be written to the file should be the left argument of
(1!:12) and the position to write should follow the file name.
'Test' 1!:12 'Test.txt';0
'C' 1!:12 'Test.txt';2
fread 'Test.txt'
TeCt
On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 6:24 AM, Hermann Wandelt bay...@online.de wrote:
I'm not very
What is 'a'? Is it a rank-1 character array of 60 bytes?
mer, 16 Dec 2009, Hermann Wandelt skribis:
I'm not very experienced in using Foreign Conjunctions. Therefore I can't
see what the length error causes.
NB.---Test No. 1
Yes Bill, 'a' is a character string of 60 bytes.
a=. 10 15 15 10 10:tpr=.sg,(sg*#Tin),(#Tin),(sg*#Tdi),#Tdi
a
' 0 0 9679 049'
__
Hermann Wandelt
Schustersweid 6
47665 Sonsbeck
E-Mail: bay...@online.de
From the documentation:
x 1!:12 yIndexed Write. x is the string to be written; y is a list of a
boxed file name (or number) and a boxed index.
You don't need to give an index and a length - J knows the shape of things.
Try something like
a (1!:12) f;sg*60
Hope this helps.
--
Devon
I guess the length error referred to the right argument of 1!:12 that
it expected a count of 2 item.
a 1!:12 f,(sg*60)
or
a 1!:12 f;(sg*60)
mer, 16 Dec 2009, Hermann Wandelt skribis:
Yes Bill, 'a' is a character string of 60 bytes.
a=. 10 15 15 10 10:tpr=.sg,(sg*#Tin),(#Tin),(sg*#Tdi),#Tdi
For those who want to train their tacit muscles, here's a challenge. A Markov
algorithm is a specialized term rewriter. It accepts
a list of rules (denoting substitutions) and a target string to evaluate. See
http://rosettacode.org/wiki/Markov_Algorithm for a
more detailed description,
Yes - it's easy to see how you might make this mistake. The foreign
conjunction immediately preceding (1!:12) is (1!:11) - indexed read - which
does require 2 numbers in the second box. Also, if you're coming from
something lik a C background, you are used to specifying the lengths of
things
On my iMac, on entering:
(?5) wdquery 'myapp' ; 'my message'
if you press Esc or click the GoAway button in the window's titlebar,
this is equivalent to clicking OK, viz 0 is returned in all cases of
left arg. The same thing happens when you try to quit J itself and see
the message: Do you
Hi -
The following appears to work OK:
Insert__db 'tblChar';,.'ABCDEF'
The ,. preceding the vector turns it into a 1-column matrix, which is
consistent with how the field is defined.
Reads__db '* from tblChar'
+--+
|c1|
+--+
|a |
|A |
|B |
|C |
|D |
|E |
|F |
+--+
Hope this helps.
On Tue,
I would like to propose an extension to dyad A. Specifically, I would like
dyad A. to interpret left-arguments in a way similar
to |. and {. , where each atom of x corresponds to an axis of y .
For example, with the new definition, the phrase (0
_1 A. i. 4 5) would reverse
The extension can be more readily accommodated (i.e.,
with backward compatibility) if the left argument were boxed.
Likewise, if we were designing from scratch (which we are not),
we would be tempted to box the left arguments of the dyads |. {. }. .
- Original Message -
From: Dan Bron
I don't see that the dyad I. (interval index) belongs with the others.
I assume you mean |. (rotate).
{
{.
}.
|.
A.
You can not have the new behaviour (boxed left arguments)
for {. }. |. and still be compatible. The left ranks are wrong.
- Original Message -
From: Joey K Tuttle
Roger wrote:
The extension can be more readily accommodated (i.e.,
with backward compatibility) if the left argument were boxed.
Good idea.
Likewise, if we were designing from scratch (which we are not),
we would be tempted to box the left arguments of the dyads |. {. }. .
Certainly
Very good observation. I had been baffled by pressing Esc
on Quit dialog and having J disappear, when cancellation of
action was expected. But I did not realize it is related to
the wrong return code of the query box.
On Windows 7, ?5 is not a good argument--depending on parameter
the value of
Thank You Bill and Devon it becomes clear to me.
Thanks again, Hermann
__
Hermann Wandelt
Schustersweid 6
47665 Sonsbeck
E-Mail: bay...@online.de
-Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
Von: programming-boun...@jsoftware.com
[mailto:programming-boun...@jsoftware.com] Im
For those who want to train their tacit muscles, here's a challenge.
A Markov algorithm is a specialized term rewriter. It accepts ...
I am not sure the problem can be handled by tacit expressions better than with
explicit expressions.
Tacit way to implement 'while' is
Yes. Sorry for my typo, and lack of thought about it...
Sent from my iCan't see what I'm typing (iPod) - excuse terseness and
typos.
- joey
On Dec 16, 2009, at 11:05, Roger Hui rhui...@shaw.ca wrote:
I don't see that the dyad I. (interval index) belongs with the others.
I assume you mean
Andrew Nikitin wrote:
I am not sure the problem can be handled by tacit expressions better
than with explicit expressions.
I had come to the same conclusion, but I wanted validation (because I find
explicit loops distasteful).
In J as it is there is no information flow between
body
I've got a process that starts with a J script to pull many spreadsheets
into one csv file and then uses a file of sql commands that sqlite3
executes in cygwin bash to populate a database. I'd like to run
everything from J and, in the process, lose the dependency on cygwin.
I'm stuck on running
Anyway, here is my submission (sans parsing)
I haven't read your code yet, but I will. Meanwhile, could you
provide a high-level comparison of your explicit implementation with
the one in my original message?
It pretty much does the same thing, but, arguably, in a fancier way.
x is
Andrew Nikitin wrote:
For those who want to train their tacit muscles, here's a challenge.
A Markov algorithm is a specialized term rewriter. It accepts ...
I am not sure the problem can be handled by tacit expressions better than
with explicit expressions.
Tacit way to
From: Bill Harris
I've got a process that starts with a J script to pull many
spreadsheets
into one csv file and then uses a file of sql commands that sqlite3
executes in cygwin bash to populate a database. I'd like to run
everything from J and, in the process, lose the dependency on
mer, 16 Dec 2009, Ian Clark skribis:
This seems counterintuitive to me. A user might expect that GoAway /
Esc equates to Cancel, not OK. Other Mac apps (eg TextEdit) disable
the GoAway within a confirmation dialog, eg on quitting with an
unsaved document... and Esc is equivalent to Cancel, not
Hi Matthew,
I asked the team leader for the project I mentioned and they actually solved it
two ways:
1. As suggested, compiled the solution with platform set to x86 instead of
AllCPU.
2. Went back to some of the 3rd party suppliers and got versions for the 64bit
OS. Actually, with this, they
Thanks to all for your help, especially Mr. Lam.
Your response, Mr. Lam, was very instructive.
I used your input to explore a bit more, with a couple of questions arising.
See the questions embedded below:
*
load 'data/jdb'
ffd =: Open_jdb_ jpath , '~temp'
27 matches
Mail list logo
