[Jprogramming] Verb display in function tables

[Dan Bron]

> A gerund is an atomic representation of a verb.  

Though more controversial than the scalar-vs-array thing, I'd also leave off the "verb" part.  No reason to restrict gerunds to vectors or verbs, IMO.

(Not to alienate the guy who's supporting my argument! :)

-Dan


Please excuse typos; composed on a handheld device.

-----Original Message-----
From: Henry Rich <HenryHRich at nc.rr.com>
Sender: programming-bounces at jsoftware.com
Date: Sat, 18 Feb 2012 13:19:45 
To: Programming forum<programming at jsoftware.com>
Reply-To: Programming forum <programming at jsoftware.com>
Subject: Re: [Jprogramming] Verb display in function tables

I think Dan has it right.  A gerund is an atomic representation of a 
verb.  Could be a scalar (I use them that way a lot).

Henry Rich

On 2/18/2012 1:10 PM, Dan Bron wrote:
> I'm not sure gerunds are defined anywhere.
>
> But if they were, the phrasing might be "arrays of atomic representations", where the "atomic representation" characteristic is the most salient, and "array" has the normal meaning (and perhaps the usual question of whether a scalar is an array?).
>
> We often (informally) think of gerunds as vectors, because we compose them with ` whose product is defined to be vector, and consume them with e.g. @. whose (left input) is most useful when vector.  But that's no reason to define gerunds as vectors, any more than to define selections as vectors, because we compose them with  ,  , and consume them with e.g. { whose (left input) is frequently vector. Or saying 'string' is a string but 's' is not.
>
> Of course, in some contexts, 's' is not considered a string.  So perhaps you are suggesting that "gerunds are are arrays of atomic representations, where the shape of the array has meaning"?  If so,  this is an interesting digression, which I'm happy to discuss, but perhaps we should move it to a different thread.
>
> The original question was not concerned with gerunds, and I doubt having the atomic representation of  f at g  (vector or scalar) in the corner of the result table would be satisfying. What was wanted was the string representation (which is produced using 5!:5, which operates on scalars, so shape doesn't have meaning to it, and neither does atomic representation).
>
> Anyway, when present the promise of J to newcomers, we need to take care not obscure the pitfalls.  The literal Jenie (dJinni?) who delivers exactly what was asked for is rarely the hero of folklore.
>
> -Dan
>
> PS:  If we wish to continue the digression, it might be better to start with the links below,  better starting point would be wh
>
>   Here's a couple places where I've attempted to capture the meaning of "gerund"
>
> Sidebar in NuVoc definition of ` :
> http://jsoftware.com/jwiki/Vocabulary/backtick#sidebar.3Agerunds
>
> As a necessary premise in the definition of a modifier utility:
> www.jsoftware.com/jwiki/DanBron/Snippets/DOOG#definition
>
> Please excuse typos; composed on a handheld device.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Raul Miller<rauldmiller at gmail.com>
> Sender: programming-bounces at jsoftware.com
> Date: Sat, 18 Feb 2012 11:52:13
> To: Programming forum<programming at jsoftware.com>
> Reply-To: Programming forum<programming at jsoftware.com>
> Subject: Re: [Jprogramming] Verb display in function tables
>
> Ok...
>
> ...except that gerunds are defined as vectors.
>
> Conceptually speaking, if it's a scalar, or a matrix, it's something
> different.  It would still be gerund-like, in character (we can
> trivially extract gerunds from it), but if we try using such things
> with primitives that handle gerunds, we are getting into undocumented
> territory.
>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm