I don't see "operand" as a neutral term. It is defined on p24:
"Operators take functions or arrays as /operands/"
Jay.
On Mon, 30 Nov 2020 at 14:20, Dr. Jürgen Sauermann
wrote:
>
> Hi Jay,
>
> I see, thanks. I was thinking of the table "NAME AND SYMBOL BINDING"
> on page 21 and repeated on page
When i try to build the latest version (1365 on Mac OS X), i get this error
message:
g++ -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I..-Wall -I sql -g -O2 -MT apl-Quad_RVAL.o
-MD -MP -MF .deps/apl-Quad_RVAL.Tpo -c -o apl-Quad_RVAL.o `test -f
'Quad_RVAL.cc' || echo './'`Quad_RVAL.cc
Quad_RVAL.cc:534:6: e
Hi Jay,
I see, thanks. I was thinking of the table "NAME AND SYMBOL
BINDING"
on page 21 and repeated on page 34. It uses the neutral term "left
operand"
without being specific whether that operand is a value, a function
or an operator.
> My
>
> 1 / / 1 1 ⍴ 1
>
> example was only meant to demonstrate that in APL2 an operator can have
> another operator (in this case itself) as left argument. And in that case
> binding
> the leftmost 1 to the left / operator would be, at least IMHO and referring
> only
> to the language reference
On Mon, 30 Nov 2020 at 11:53, Dr. Jürgen Sauermann
wrote:
> Still wondering if monadic ⍸ B with non-boolean B has a real-life use case?
There's a presentation here that mentions some use cases:
https://www.dyalog.com/dyalog/dyalog-versions/180.htm (Language
Features of Dyalog version 18.0 in Dept
Hi,
after investigating ⍸ I have added it to my TODO list.
Although its monadic form could be easily emulated with standard APL
primitives,
the dyadic form seems to be useful (find the interval into which a value
falls) and,
more importantly, not so easy to implement in APL.
Still wondering
Hi Jürgen,
thank your for the ≡≡ (deep depth:-) of your explanation and covering
the boundaries of this
wonderful language. 45 years ago I learned, that working with APL there
was never ever a side effect
caused by a "more sensible syntax short cut" for the sake of
readability. Made me scratch
