It would be fun if one could write the above as 1+⍢⍴

i'm writing tests for tinyapl and noticed that dyadic ℜ and ℑ are defined respectively as \x y -> realPart y :+ imagPart x and \x y -> realPart x :+ imagPart y. do these definitions make sense, or should they, like Set Phase, use the right argument as a whole, to set the part of the left argument?

(xℜy ↔ (ℜy)⊕(ℑx) and xℑy ↔ (ℜx)⊕(ℑy))

beacuse set phase is x∡y ↔ (|x)⊗y and not (|x)⊗(∡y)

as was suggested here

(becuase of course you can just write ∡∘∡ if you want the latter behavior)

@RubenVerg That kind of questions is why I think one should rather build them from more fundamental components than have them as built-ins. Using Under is of course fun too.

i guess there's no real reason to have dyadic ℜ/ℑ, it's just that the monadic ones seem good to add and i didn't want to leave dyadic meanings empty

but if you think those don't make sense, i can drop them in the next version

(or, i guess, just leave them in and not care)

Your language :-)

you're right... these are the decisions i don't know how to pick... i'll think about it

they don't particularly feel like useful primitives, in either form, but they might be interesting anyways

👋

@RGS Wow, it has been a while. Welcome back!

@Adám It has! How are you doing?

Good. Busy as always.

I can imagine!

So, you're back in the APL World?

I don't know 🤷 I just realised I hadn't been in the APL Orchard in a loooong time!

But this looks quiet, right?

Goes up and down. The apl.wiki/APL_Quest series generated quite some traffic and contents, but that just finished.

But there's plenty of activity in the community in general. Now there'll be 4 yearly competitions (an easier version of the old phase 1) plus the new yearly APL Forge incubator. APL Seeds '24 is tomorrow.

I think I saw something on Twitter about the APL quest

Can you link to something about the apl forge? Hadn't heard of it and a quick google search doesn't surface the right results.

It is just being put together now, so there's nothing more online than forge.dyalog.com and its mention in the latest Array Cast.

Oh, that looks quite interesting!

Just registered for APL seeds

Hopefully I'll be able to join and listen in.

Is everyone doing well at Dyalog?

@RGS Yeah. We have a few new faces on the roster.

Yeah, I noticed the other day! It's great to see the team grow.

@RGS I was already planning to show (half of) your face in my intro presentation. If you feel like joining the panel for a discussion during the event, then just say so, and we'll promote you.

@RubenVerg Why ℜ is using that definition? Couldn't just use ℑ with commute?

Assume :+ is commute

@LdBeth hmm, i guess so. do you have any alternative definiton that would make more sense than just a pair of the same function but commuted?

@LdBeth :+ is the complex constructor, a :+ b → a + i×b

I think dyadic ℜ can be defined to be Euclidean distance between a pair of complex numbers, if you haven't define it else where

or angle between them

or even you can give both result composed as a complex number

@LdBeth it's an interesting function but i don't really see why it'd belong on ℜ

i guess it wouldn't be the first time apl gives random meanings to glyphs, though

@RubenVerg R can also stands for "Real coordinate space" and "Rotate" :D

@Adám Thanks :) I still don't know if/when I'll be able to join let alone if I'll have anything to contribute to the discussion!