Now I can't replicate what I put in my prior message, which makes me think
I had index origin set to 1 for the first expression.
So never mind. :/
On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 1:15 PM, Mike Duvos wrote:
>
>)CLEAR
>
> CLEAR WS
>
> ⎕IO←0
>
> ⌹/3 3 ⍴⍳9
> 1.5 4.8 7.875
>
> ⍝ This sho
)CLEAR
CLEAR WS
⎕IO←0
⌹/3 3 ⍴⍳9
1.5 4.8 7.875
⍝ This should be the same as...
(0 ⌹ 1 ⌹ 2) , (3 ⌹ 4 ⌹ 5) , (6 ⌹ 7 ⌹ 8)
0 3.75 6.857142857
⍝ Which is the correct answer
Hi Jay,
Thanks. That's an interesting bit of info.
IBM APL2 returns 5. According to the APL2 manual, the system uses relative
tolerance.
With absolute tolerance, as long as they are still using a closed interval
around the number, it should still return 5.
If I fudge 5 by half the comparison
I don't know anything about the GNU APL implementation, but I can tell
you that the definition of tolerant-floor changed between standard APL
(ISO 8485) and Extended APL (ISO 13751). In ISO 8485 the tolerance is
relative, so both your examples should definitely return 5. In
Extended APL the toleran
