RikedyP

@PaulMansour I think it's fine to see bracket axis as "syntactic sugar" over using the rank operator with dyadic transpose, but using rank and transpose is a good way of understanding what enclose-with-axies ⊂[] and merge axes ,[] are really like

      ⊂⍤2⊢1 3 2⍉2 3 4⍴⎕A
┌───┬───┐
│AEI│MQU│
│BFJ│NRV│
│CGK│OSW│
│DHL│PTX│
└───┴───┘

      ⊂[3 2]2 3 4⍴⎕A
┌───┬───┐
│AEI│MQU│
│BFJ│NRV│
│CGK│OSW│
│DHL│PTX│
└───┴───┘

Oh so to answer your question, f¨⊂[1]M - but remember ⊂[k] does a sneaky transpose under the hood, hence why I call it syntactic sugar. See, for example,

The preference of rank operator is also because it can apply to any function, including user-defined functions, directly without this splitting. Also it's ⎕IO-independent unlike enclose-axes. Enclose-axes is also rank-dependent, like F⍤2⊢a always acts on 2-cells (matrices) of a, but ⊂[1]a could act on columns of a matrix, or down the planes of a 3D array.

these days I think of ⊂[k] as syntactic sugar over (F⍤x)y⍉a (or should it be F⍤k⊢y⍉a?)

in theory there could be performance gains in many cases because the interpreter doesn't have to chase pointers as in a nested array, but in practice it's more like - those who learned APL in the past prefer (axes / enclose / each) and those who learn more recently prefer (rank operator / transpose)

no because rank operator is leading-axis oriented - the rank operator and dyadic transpose are the flat array / leading axis / more general sisters of each and and enclose-axes ⊂[k] for some vector k

@RubenVerg 3 4⌷⍠'IO' 0⊢⎕A ⍝ lovely

is it "return all the ones" as in result length is shorter, or can we have 0s in places of those that occur twice?

Oops ofc not

Is it {⍵⊆⍨1+(10×⍳≢⍵)⍸+\⍵}?

I think there's a workspace in there you can use

github.com/Dyalog/MiServer/releases/download/…

You'll want to download from the GitHub releases: github.com/Dyalog/MiServer/releases

Has anyone managed to get apl-form = 'enable' to work when compiling Iosevka font? github.com/be5invis/Iosevka/blob/main/doc/custom-build.md

Announcement: We're doing a live stream on 18 January. I'll be hosting some APLers, including Aaron Hsu, and we'll be looking at solutions to Advent of Code 2023 in Dyalog APL. Reply here or email rpark at dyalog if you'd like to be part of the panel discussing solutions, otherwise we'll be responding to comments and questions from YouTube live chat on the day. youtube.com/live/sx7LU3oicFY

@B.Wilson It is listed on this page dyalog.com/tools/tools-and-code-libraries.htm, in general trying to improve the visibility of tools, so please let me know if there's anything not on there you think ought to be (notwithstanding that the page itself is not very visible)

more useful tips: dyalog.com/getting-started/tips.htm

then save settings aplcart.info/?q=save%20session%20config

]box on

There is a server issue with the APL Wiki that I am unable to do anything about. Sorry for the inconvenience. It is unclear when it will be back up, current estimate perhaps a few hours.

@Adám Yeah just talked with Fi - her new project has @font-face but the current one doesn't right now

@Jonah Got any errors in the browser developer console (F12 on chrome/firefox)?

and what it should be is still kind of up for debate

but yeah there's not really one that a lot of people point to and go "if you want to adhere to a standard, try that one"

well some organisations have code styles

or is the point to have a DSL for your app, where the underlying code can be understood by any APLer?

should people lean on the shared core notation? or are we all making DSLs?

of course soon you'll be getting into the notation debate once you start abstracting in this way

Adám sometimes speaks of his father defining where←⌿⍨so you can do items where condition

of course you get a nested result, but you'd need that for multiple anyway

more so if you do like a {⍵[⍵⍵⍳⊆⍺⍺]}, then you can select 1 or several columns

no that's not an uncommon way of going about things

Next week will be 2019-10: Odds & Evens

anyway thanks for your contributions today - see you around !

maybe our poetry is not as good ;)

Yeah it's just called "variation" in English I think

it says "opposed to repetition", but I'm guessing the idea is you want to say the same thing again (for effect) but not literally use the same phrase again

yeah not sure we have that in English as a single word

Oh so it includes several rhetorical concepts in the one word "variatio"

@RubenVerg yes please let's see before I go

@Richard Thanks as always @Richard

like in music too? if you have a theme

I think "variation" as @Richard said is maybe closest

@RubenVerg yeah that's also a term with a few meanings in English, but I think I get the gist

you'd say "a variation" as the thing that is different, whereas variety is just the quality of having differences

but how broad is "constructs" in that definition?

@RubenVerg oh probably synonyms then?

right any last Qs before I dip out?