[Jprogramming] Tacit trains o. inverse

[Raul Miller]

That's valid, and now that you mention it, I remember that I've used
that sometimes, to save a parentheses pair.

So the ar behavior would have to engage only when one of the arguments
is already boxed.

Thanks,

-- 
Raul

On Fri, Oct 15, 2021 at 1:15 PM 'Pascal Jasmin' via Programming
<programming at jsoftware.com> wrote:
>
> technically,
>
>  1`2
>
> 1 2
>
> exists as a non-error though silly use unless trying to trigger error if an boxed paramerter were provided, which still seems like a silly use, considering both that such careful guarding would guard against so much more parameters, and , will also fail with boxed paired with unboxed parameter, and , provides the natural :: "deal with error" function, that can't as easily be done with ` errors.
>
> , behaves identically to ` with nouns.  There's no real reason to use ` with nouns with its current definition.  I'd suspect that any historical use would be for purely esoteric obfuscation motives.
>
> so if 9.03 is already committed to breaking things. I think reworking ` to produce ar s all the time (which is what "ti" is defined to do, as well as "atomic representation of unboxed nouns in place of those nouns." you refer), I think would provide a welcome specialization of ` for use in gerund forming.
>
> This would solve the following common errors as well
>
>
> f`0`]}
>
> to transform head (or other specific) index of an array.  This form is allowed in } as long as nouns are properly gerundified.
>
> On Friday, October 15, 2021, 09:43:56 a.m. EDT, Raul Miller <rauldmiller at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> Perhaps also worth noting that ` could have its definition updated to
> use the atomic representation of unboxed nouns in place of those
> nouns.
>
> That's not exactly the definition of your ti conjunction, but it also
> would not change the behavior of any current non-error case, and would
> address the common cases.
>
> (Also, boxing in general is going to require a little extra coding
> work because the abstraction is all about combining data structures
> which otherwise would not be combined.)
>
> Thanks,
>
> --
> Raul
>
> On Fri, Oct 15, 2021 at 8:28 AM 'Pascal Jasmin' via Programming
> <programming at jsoftware.com> wrote:
> >
> > On the off chance anyone forgot or is not sick of hearing it, CC is still superfluous given a conjunction called "ti" (or redefinition of `) that builds a gerund from nouns in addition to verbs
> >
> >
> > 1 (& :. (((-ti)(`:6)) & ].)) o.
> >
> > 1&o. :.(_1&o.)
> >
> > but also note that the original {{-m}} definition met the "semi-tacit" criteria of returning a tacit expression without any significant computation
> >
> >
> > but I am liking the CCC definition (more than similar/equivalent ACC).  Which can also be used to construct uACu from an A and C with:
> >
> >
> > ((([.A) C [.) a:)
> >
> >
> > if AC were uA(Cv), original request could be simplified as
> >
> >
> > (& :. ({{-m}} & )  NB. or with the ti construct
> >
> >
> >
> > On Friday, October 15, 2021, 03:57:46 a.m. EDT, Elijah Stone <elronnd at elronnd.net> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Fri, 15 Oct 2021, Henry Rich wrote:
> >
> > >    oi =: (& :. ((-([.].)) & ].)) o.
> > >    1 oi
> > > 1&o. :.(_1&o.)
> >
> > Putting the V N bident to good use already, I see :)
> >
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > 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
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm