Re: [Bug-apl] Power Operator (⍣) broken at svn 740 ?

2016-06-12 Thread Xiao-Yong Jin
Hi Jüergen and Christian, > On Jun 12, 2016, at 4:28 AM, Juergen Sauermann > wrote: > > the reason is that the arguments of the right function argument of ⍣ > have different lengths and are therefore always unequal: > > FIB←{ 3↓ {⍵,+/¯2↑⍵}⍣{(↑⍵)≤¯3+⍴⍺ ⊣ ⎕←'debug:' (⍴⍵) 'vs' (⍴¯3+⍴⍺)} ⊢ ⍵

Re: [Bug-apl] Option parsing patch

2016-06-12 Thread Juergen Sauermann
Hi David, thanks, applied in SVN 741. /// Jürgen On 06/12/2016 06:55 AM, David B. Lamkins wrote: This patch corrects a problem with the -p and -l options not recognizing their arguments. Index: src/UserPreferences.cc

Re: [Bug-apl] Inconsistent behaviour or operator /

2016-06-12 Thread Juergen Sauermann
Hi Elias, yes, I believe so. The ISO standard, chapter 9.2.1 Reduction, allows 2 different variants for reduction called the Enclose-Reduction-Style (aka. APL2 style) and the Insert-Reduction-Style (aka. Sharp/J style). GNU APL use

Re: [Bug-apl] Power Operator (⍣) broken at svn 740 ?

2016-06-12 Thread Christian Robert
I see. Will test this later. Unequal to zero or one or > 1, because they are vector of length 1 rather than boolean scalar ? what about {1+(divide)⍵}⍣5 ⊢ 1 in that case, 5 would not be a boolean. scalar, yes, but not boolean. personnaly I prefer the old def who equiv scalar and vector of leng

Re: [Bug-apl] Power Operator (⍣) broken at svn 740 ?

2016-06-12 Thread Juergen Sauermann
Hi Xtian, the reason is that the arguments of the right function argument of ⍣ have different lengths and are therefore always unequal:   FIB←{ 3↓ {⍵,+/¯2↑⍵}⍣{(↑⍵)≤¯3+⍴⍺ ⊣ ⎕←'debug:' (⍴⍵) 'vs' (⍴¯3+⍴⍺)} ⊢ ⍵, 0 1 }   FIB 12  debug: