[Jprogramming] Adverbial Tacit Jym

[Raul Miller]

Ok, so... let's see if I understand the new rules -- our a1x1
expression must exclude all of these adverbs:
   /  (128!:2) (5!:0)

and these conjunctions:
   & &. &.: &:  @  @. @: or  `:

and these verbs:
   [:   ".   128!:2   ":^:_1

and we must avoid "string evaluation where the strings are not
gerunds" (whatever that exactly means... maybe it's avoiding strings
which contain more than one token when parsed by ;: and also requires
all remaining strings to be boxed? I'm actually not completely
sure...)

That leaves us with these primitive adverbs:
   /.  \  \.  }  b.  f.  M. t. t:

And, these primitive conjunctions
   ^:   .   ..   .:   :   :.   ::   ;.   !.   !:   "   `  d.  D.  D:
H.  L:   S:  T.

And most of the primitive verbs.

Except, of course the "avoid string evaluation" limits : and !:
(though see above for my uncertainty about the exact scope of that
limitation).

Given this whole "spirit" issue, I guess I should imagine that the use
of non-primitive names is also excluded.

Thanks,

-- 
Raul


On Mon, Apr 4, 2016 at 5:50 PM, Dan Bron <j at bron.us> wrote:
> ]\. 'beware spoilers'
> beware spoilers
> eware spoilers
> ware spoilers
> are spoilers
> re spoilers
> e spoilers
> spoilers
> spoilers
> poilers
> oilers
> ilers
> lers
> ers
> rs
> s
>
>
>
>
>
> In addition to Raul’s suggested (`:3), which I take to be against the spirit of the challenge, how about:
>
>      a1x1 =. ( ^:((] {.)`1:`(] {:)) ) ~
>
> Not sure if you count (] f) as cheating-ly avoiding @: etc; if you don’t like it, I can find a different way (I considered [: but discarded it as within the letter but against the spirit).
>
> Now, if you want me to be *really* sneaky, I can remind you of this little hidden gem [1]:
>
>
>    _9:`7:^:_1 'this is weird'
> _9
>
> Or, if you don’t mind good old brute force, I should remind you to disbar 5!:0 wherever you disbar (`:6) . It’s a little harder to work with, but not much harder.
>
> You should state clearly that any solution based on string-evaluation, be it “. or 128!:2 or ~ or even really sneaky things like “:^:_1 and 9!:26 are prohibited. No fun at all. Gerunds or bust.
>
> -Dan
>
>
> [1] aka “gerund^:_1”, buried in the sands which have drifted since 1996:
>     http://www.jsoftware.com/help/release/status.htm#3.02 <http://www.jsoftware.com/help/release/status.htm#3.02>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>> On Apr 4, 2016, at 12:08 PM, Jose Mario Quintana <jose.mario.quintana at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Let us consider yet one more twist, courtesy of Dan, to the Exercise 1
>> variant (a1x0 described below); that is, produce, say a1x1 without
>> involving either /, &, &:, @, @:, &., &.:, @.  or  `:6  such that for
>> arbitrary but specific u and N,
>>
>> ( (u a1)N )  -:  ( (u a1x1)N ),
>>
>> for example,
>>
>>           * a1x1 2 3 5 7
>> 14
>>     (1 + %) a1x1 3 5 7 9
>> 1.33333333
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 7:00 PM, Jose Mario Quintana <
>> jose.mario.quintana at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Let us add another twist, courtesy of David Lambert, to the Exercise 1:
>>>
>>> Produce a variant of a1, say a1x0 without involving either @.  or  `:6
>>> such that for arbitrary but specific u and N,
>>>
>>> ( (u a1)N )  -:  ( (u a1x0)N ),
>>>
>>> for example,
>>>
>>>    * a1x0 2 3 5 7
>>> 14
>>>    (1 + %)  a1x0 3 5 7 9
>>> 1.33333333
>>>
>>> Clarification (just in case):  No one is recommending to use any solutions
>>> for a1x0 vs other solutions for a1; this is meant to be a puzzle.
>>>
>>> P.S.  Remember to show spoiler alerts.  It is ease to forget; believe me,
>>> I know :)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 6:32 PM, Jose Mario Quintana <
>>> jose.mario.quintana at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Right, so let us add a twist to the Exercise 1:
>>>>
>>>> Minor alert for anyone that have not seen Pascal's solution for a1...
>>>>
>>>> 7
>>>> 6
>>>> 5
>>>> 4
>>>> 3
>>>> 2
>>>> 1
>>>> 0
>>>>
>>>> Produce a1 without involving  @. in the code.
>>>>
>>>> Remember: "Spoiler alerts by instructors and patrons will be
>>>> appreciated."
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 3:43 PM, <neitzel at gaertner.de> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Pascal Jasmin wrote:
>>>>>> a0 =:
>>>>>> a1 =:
>>>>>
>>>>> You are confusing the Jym with the Spoilarium, I'm afraid.
>>>>>
>>>>>                                                Martin Neitzel
>>>>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>> For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm