Why would you make an assumption like this and try to compare code? If the sample code were simply subtraction then OP would've written subtraction. What use is demonstrating APL code that solves a different problem? If you're gonna do that, instead of removing part of the problem you might as well remove most of the problem and just say the solution is:
⌈/dest-source
And then write some sentence about saying how that's valid because you declare they are normalized even further.
> Here's my take on performScan, too: > Log⍪←onSourceTime+slewTime
How is this valid if you don't actually do any work to calculate onSourceTime or slewTime? You took the last line of performScan and implemented it. You do need to also implement the other lines in the function.
Maybe I'm just completely missing something here.