Re: Each ¨ - behavior of func without parameter

[Dr . Jürgen Sauermann]

    Hi Otto,
      
      simple answer: {3} is niladic in GNU APL (since lack of ⍵) and
      monadic
      (why?) in Dyalog et al.
      
      To get the Dyalog behaviour in GNU APL use {3⊣⍵} instead of {3}:
      
            {3⊣⍵} ¨⍳5
      3 3 3 3 3
      
      That makes the lambda monadic in GNU APL and discards its argument
      like Dyalog does. You will get the same SYNTAX ERROR in Dyalog if
      you
      call EACH with a niladic function (except that it can't be a
      lambda then):
      
          ⎕FX 'Z←FOO' 'Z←3' 
            FOO¨⍳5
      SYNTAX ERROR
            FOO¨⍳5
               ∧
      
      I personally believe that there should be no differences between
      "normal"
      defined functions (with ⎕FX or the ∇-editor) and lambda, but that
      opinion
      is not shared unanimously.
    
    Best Regards,
    Jürgen

On 1/3/21 2:32 PM, Otto Diesenbacher-Reinmüller wrote:

> Dear APLers,
>
> I don't think this is a bug, but intentionally:
>
> Doing f.e.:
>
> { 3 } ¨ ⍳5
>
> results in gnu-apl to an error:
>
> SYNTAX ERROR
>       λ1¨⍳5
>       ^  ^
>
> In other APLs, this works just fine, f.e. dyalog (or even april):
>
>       { 3 } ¨ ⍳5
> 3 3 3 3 3
>
> More general without Each/¨, f.e. 
>   { 3 } 55
>
> results in gnu-apl in
>
> 3 55
>
> but in dyalog (and others) in
>
> 3
>
> What's the background of this different behavior in gnu-apl? I also
> couldn't find any hint in IBMs APL2 Reference for this behavior.
>
> br & and many thanks for any hint!
>
> br Otto
>
>