[Jprogramming] Agenda in explicit expressions WAS: Tacit Expressions with Explicit J Syntax

[Raul Miller]

Hmm.. after re-reading the dictionary definition, I think I was wrong
when I said that
  x $: <: y
was the meaning for $: in that second example:

Since no verbs are formed in that sentence, $: just refers to itself
as the largest containing verb.

Please tell me if you have reason to think I'm wrong about this.

Thanks,

-- 
Raul


On Sat, Sep 30, 2017 at 6:44 PM, Henry Rich <henryhrich at gmail.com> wrote:
> The problem is that we mean different things by 'work'.  To me, that means
> it behaves the way NuVoc says it does.  I get the feeling that to you,
> 'works' means it behaves the way you want it to.
>
> It works, by my meaning.  The Dictionary is not precise about the behavior
> of $: in explicit definitions.
>
> Henry Rich
>
>
> On 9/30/2017 6:04 PM, Erling Hellenäs wrote:
>>
>> I guess it would be impossible to get you to acknowledge that it does not
>> work  with explicit J in agenda :) /Erling
>>
>> On 2017-09-30 23:16, Raul Miller wrote:
>>>
>>> Yes, if you want to explicitly reference the definition of f, you
>>> should use the name f (like you used at first), and not $:
>>>
>>> $: refers to the containing sentence, which in your example was
>>>     x $: <: y
>>>
>>> To have $: mean something different you need to use it in a different
>>> sentence (which is entirely possible, of course).
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>> For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
>
>
>
> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
> http://www.avg.com
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm