Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!chaph.usc.edu!usc.edu!news
From: news@usc.edu
Newsgroups: comp.lang.apl
Subject: Re: a new dimension
Summary: It's a feature, not a bug
Message-ID: <12060@chaph.usc.edu>
Date: 20 Sep 90 08:21:40 GMT
References: <Sep.20.02.36.50.1990.11172@planchet.rutgers.edu>
Sender: news@chaph.usc.edu
Reply-To: raulmill@usc.edu (but this account vanishes this week)
Organization: University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA
Lines: 17
Nntp-Posting-Host: girtab.usc.edu
In-reply-to: josh@planchet.rutgers.edu's message of 20 Sep 90 06:36:51 GMT
Originator: news@girtab.usc.edu

In article <Sep.20.02.36.50.1990.11172@planchet.rutgers.edu>
josh@planchet.rutgers.edu (J Storrs Hall) writes: 

   In J, function rank seems to be set to 0 when functions are
   composed even though it was originally something else, e.g.

      (5&{.)&(5&*) i.10           gives the same result as
      (5&{.)"0 (5&*) i.10         and NOT the same as 
      (5&{.) (5&*) i.10           as one would expect.

   Is this a bug or a feature (or an implementation limitation)?

It has to be a feature.

Composition produces a single function.  You're doing 5 take of the
result of 5 times.  Since times is a scalar function (rank 0 verb),
the composition is also rank 0.