Mention ⌾(<˘) for reshaping first axis only

1 files changed, 1 insertions, 1 deletions

diff --git a/commentary/problems.md b/commentary/problems.md
index 451041b9..fc5b160b 100644
--- a/commentary/problems.md
+++ b/commentary/problems.md
@@ -97,7 +97,7 @@ So it seems a bit strange to rely on it for core language features like `/⁼`.
 It's an awkward inconsistency. Prefixes and Suffixes have to have a nested result, but Windows doesn't have to be flat; it's just that making it nested ignores the fact that it does have an array structure.
 
 ### Deshape and Reshape can't ignore trailing axes
-If you want to repeat 3 major cells until there are 7 of them, or combine the first 4 axes of a rank-6 array, what's your best option? Nothing's too good: you could compute a full shape for Reshape, enclose cells and merge afterwards, use Select to reshape one axis to multiple, or use `∾˝` to merge two axes (with possible empty-array issues). This is particularly dangerous with computed-length reshapes like `2‿∘⥊…`, since the idea of splitting off a length-2 axis from an array's first axis is generally useful, but this version has an implicit Deshape first. J's Reshape analogue (`$`) only ever applies to the first axis. This also seems to be giving up a lot.
+If you want to repeat 3 major cells until there are 7 of them, or combine the first 4 axes of a rank-6 array, what's your best option? Nothing's too good: you could compute a full shape for Reshape, enclose cells and merge afterwards (for example `7⊸⥊⌾(<˘)`), use Select to reshape one axis to multiple, or use `∾˝` to merge two axes (with possible empty-array issues). This is particularly dangerous with computed-length reshapes like `2‿∘⥊…`, since the idea of splitting off a length-2 axis from an array's first axis is generally useful, but this version has an implicit Deshape first. J's Reshape analogue (`$`) only ever applies to the first axis. This also seems to be giving up a lot.
 
 ### At which scope does a block function belong?
 As a general principle, a programmer should make choices in one part of a program that constrain other parts of the program most tightly. This is a weak principle, but often it doesn't conflict with any other preferences and can be followed for free. For example it's usually best to define a variable in the smallest possible scope, so the reader knows it isn't used outside that scope. The same principle applies to blocks, but there is another conflicting principle: placing the block in a broader scope guarantees it won't access the variables in narrower ones. There's no position that will tell the reader, for example, that a function only uses variables local to itself and that it's only used within one particular scope.