« first day (2240 days earlier)      last day (632 days later) » 

Jeremy gee
Jeremy gee
00:03
I think this is working.
m←{⍵÷⍨4×+/0.25≥(((¯0.5+?⍵⍴0)*2)+((¯0.5+?⍵⍴0)*2))}
is there a way to combine this expression so I don't have to repeat it
(¯0.5+?⍵⍴0)*2)
never mind. will research. I appreciate all the assistance.
rak1507
rak1507
01:02
if you want a hint consider a 2 by ⍵ or ⍵ by 2 matrix
Jeremy gee
Jeremy gee
01:19
nice. will rework it.
LdBeth
LdBeth
02:11
@Adám So we still needs to write in tradfns form if we define tacit function in phase 2?
hmm, anyhoo, changed to dfns
 
3 hours later…
Aiden Chow
Aiden Chow
04:52
@LdBeth damn how da hell u already onto phase 2, u finish phase 1 already??
B. Wilson
B. Wilson
05:09
@AidenChow Once you've APLed enough, Phase 1 problems actually become pretty second-nature, IMO. I think I knocked mine out within a couple hours, polishing and all. That said, when I first started out, just one of them might have taken that long, so don't feel discouraged. The learning curve is steep for us all.
Adám
Adám
05:23
@LdBeth Yes, because we cannot syntax check tacit functions.
B. Wilson
B. Wilson
BTW, will adding cute comments in the Phase 1 answers mess anything up?
Have a few instances that basically use Under semantics, and wanted to point that out :P
Tests are working just fine, of course.
Adám
Adám
@B.Wilson iirc, we just strip those out.
B. Wilson
B. Wilson
So will no human actually see them?
Adám
Adám
I can look at the code a bit later, but comments cannot be allowed to give an advantage since it clearly says:
> You should not include comments in your Phase 1 solutions.
By all means, add as many comments as you like for publication after the deadline.
B. Wilson
B. Wilson
Ah, okay. I'll strip out, then.
Aiden Chow
Aiden Chow
05:38
how the judges gonna understand what i coded if i dont put any comment
like mines is actually horrible
im looking back on my previous answers and already kinda confused on what i was doing.... and i wrote the solutions myself!!
also how is lcm and gcd calculated for non integer numbers??
WTFFF i just passed 1:7 and idek why whatever i did works
like through some completely random experimentation i stumble upon a way to retrieve the numerator.... wow
super short solution too, WOW
B. Wilson
B. Wilson
Gradient descent programming! :P
Aiden Chow
Aiden Chow
i click the link to see lcm and gcd... it doesnt tell much on how it calculate for non integer numbers
so im super confused on this lol
but i pass it with gold trophy.... ill take it :D
@B.Wilson lol more like "bashing my keyboard randomly until smth works" programming
now only 1:10 left
here we go
@B.Wilson wats under semantics
ok wait in hindsight what i did for 1:7 to retrieve the numerator actually makes a lot of sense
cant believe i found it randomly tho
the hints really do help lol
B. Wilson
B. Wilson
06:01
@AidenChow Places where I had to use the manual expansion of the (proposed) Under operator: aplwiki.com/wiki/Under
 
8 hours later…
LdBeth
LdBeth
13:50
@AidenChow this comments enables me to shorten my 1:7 by two chars
LdBeth
LdBeth
14:10
@B.Wilson speaking of Under, I really wish ⊢⍢⍸ can preserve the identity property.
However someone must disagree
Adám
Adám
@LdBeth For Booleans, that's @⊢ no?
LdBeth
LdBeth
For example I want (N∘↑⍢⍸ )=⍥≢⊢ to be true for most of the case
B. Wilson
B. Wilson
14:36
@LdBeth You might like this: dyalog.com/blog/2023/01/structural-vs-mathematical-under
 
1 hour later…
Aiden Chow
Aiden Chow
15:40
@LdBeth lolol what, how
LdBeth
LdBeth
16:00
knowing that it is short is enough information for me to optimize it
Aiden Chow
Aiden Chow
16:11
lol true, but i really didnt expect it to be so short
only 12 chars!!!
could probably be a bit shorter if i was better at apl but eh
LdBeth
LdBeth
@AidenChow mine is 9, was 11
Aiden Chow
Aiden Chow
16:47
@LdBeth man im bad
Adám
Adám
@AidenChow No, you're not. Imagine how much code you'd need to write this in Python.
as_integer_ratio() is 18 chars!
Aiden Chow
Aiden Chow
@Adám lol but like compare to other apl answer mines is longer :(
 
4 hours later…
Silas
Silas
20:37
@LdBeth think I understand this and @Adám's response but could you explain why that's important?
Adám
Adám
@Silas Example: 
      3∘↑⍢⍸3 4⍴1 0 1 0,1 0 1 1,0 0 0 0
1 0 1 0
1 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
Compare: 
      ⍸⍣¯1⊢3∘↑⍸3 4⍴1 0 1 0,1 0 1 1,0 0 0 0
1 0 1
1 0 0
@user855082 Hi V. Rosales, if you want to participate here, please email [email protected]
Silas
Silas
Ohh, so another structural vs mathematical difference
Adám
Adám
Indeed.
However, the current model cannot do the structural thing, because it is kind of computational.
Similar to this one: 
      2∘×⍢|3J4
6J8
Silas
Silas
Ok, would that be possible via some sort of combination of both unders? Or would that require a combined version to work?
Adám
Adám
20:52
⍸ would require two separate operators to avoid inconsistency. | could use a combined.

« first day (2240 days earlier)      last day (632 days later) »