Repository navigation
[Feature request] Extend a monadic idiom u&.(m&{) to dyadic valence #212
Description
An idiom u&.(m&{) is monadic only implementing:
m}&y u m&{ y NB. u&.(m&{) yI propose to extend it to support dyadic application implementing:
m}&y (m&{ x) u m&{ y NB. x u&.(m&{) yThat is, to make an idiom u&.(m&{) ambivalent.
Activity
HenryHRich commentedon Mar 29, 2026
Not a bad thought, but the vast majority of uses would not need (m{x) so it would be better to use x instead. This is a semidual rather than a dual.
This is structural under, which is already a separate case of &. using its own inverse. Perhaps the dyad case of structural under should be a semidual.