Skip to main content

Compile and uncompilable function bug?


I think I found a bug, but I still have MMA version 11.0.1 installed. Can somebody please check if this persists in the latest version?


When I compile this function:


cf = Compile[{{n, _Integer}},
Module[{good},
good = True;
If[DuplicateFreeQ[{}] && n == 15, good = False];

good
]
];

The result changes once the condition is met:


cf[14]
cf[15]
cf[14]
(* True *)
(* False *)

(* False *)

Here it is immaterial what list is given to DuplicateFreeQ.


Addendum 1


As @Jason B. and @Michael E2 pointed out, the important thing is that DuplicateFreeQ cannot be compiled. Thus, a more general example is


fun := True; (* use := so fun cannot be compiled *)
With[{cf = Compile[{{n, _Integer}},
Module[{xyz},
xyz = True;
If[fun && n == 15, xyz = False];

xyz
]
]},
{cf[14], cf[15], cf[14]}
]
(* {True, False, False} *)

Now, @Michael E2 wrote that it seems as if



there is a runtime environment in the WVM connected to cf, in which the assignment good = False leaks out in some form and is stored across calls to cf.




Here is some evidence for that, I think:



  1. Quit the kernel.

  2. ?Global`xyz* gives a warning that there is no xyz defined.

  3. Evaluate


With[{cf = Compile[{{n, _Integer}}, Module[{xyz}, xyz = True; If[n == 15, xyz = False]; xyz]]}, {cf[14], cf[15], cf[14]}] (* {True, False, True} *)


as it should be.





  1. ?Global`xyz* shows that a Global`xyz has been defined.




  2. Evaluate the code at the beginning of Addendum 1, giving the wrong result {True, False, False}, and you find that Global`xyz as well as Global`xyz$ are defined, where Global`xyz$ has the attribute Temporary.






Comments

Popular posts from this blog

plotting - Filling between two spheres in SphericalPlot3D

Manipulate[ SphericalPlot3D[{1, 2 - n}, {θ, 0, Pi}, {ϕ, 0, 1.5 Pi}, Mesh -> None, PlotPoints -> 15, PlotRange -> {-2.2, 2.2}], {n, 0, 1}] I cant' seem to be able to make a filling between two spheres. I've already tried the obvious Filling -> {1 -> {2}} but Mathematica doesn't seem to like that option. Is there any easy way around this or ... Answer There is no built-in filling in SphericalPlot3D . One option is to use ParametricPlot3D to draw the surfaces between the two shells: Manipulate[ Show[SphericalPlot3D[{1, 2 - n}, {θ, 0, Pi}, {ϕ, 0, 1.5 Pi}, PlotPoints -> 15, PlotRange -> {-2.2, 2.2}], ParametricPlot3D[{ r {Sin[t] Cos[1.5 Pi], Sin[t] Sin[1.5 Pi], Cos[t]}, r {Sin[t] Cos[0 Pi], Sin[t] Sin[0 Pi], Cos[t]}}, {r, 1, 2 - n}, {t, 0, Pi}, PlotStyle -> Yellow, Mesh -> {2, 15}]], {n, 0, 1}]

plotting - Plot 4D data with color as 4th dimension

I have a list of 4D data (x position, y position, amplitude, wavelength). I want to plot x, y, and amplitude on a 3D plot and have the color of the points correspond to the wavelength. I have seen many examples using functions to define color but my wavelength cannot be expressed by an analytic function. Is there a simple way to do this? Answer Here a another possible way to visualize 4D data: data = Flatten[Table[{x, y, x^2 + y^2, Sin[x - y]}, {x, -Pi, Pi,Pi/10}, {y,-Pi,Pi, Pi/10}], 1]; You can use the function Point along with VertexColors . Now the points are places using the first three elements and the color is determined by the fourth. In this case I used Hue, but you can use whatever you prefer. Graphics3D[ Point[data[[All, 1 ;; 3]], VertexColors -> Hue /@ data[[All, 4]]], Axes -> True, BoxRatios -> {1, 1, 1/GoldenRatio}]

plotting - Mathematica: 3D plot based on combined 2D graphs

I have several sigmoidal fits to 3 different datasets, with mean fit predictions plus the 95% confidence limits (not symmetrical around the mean) and the actual data. I would now like to show these different 2D plots projected in 3D as in but then using proper perspective. In the link here they give some solutions to combine the plots using isometric perspective, but I would like to use proper 3 point perspective. Any thoughts? Also any way to show the mean points per time point for each series plus or minus the standard error on the mean would be cool too, either using points+vertical bars, or using spheres plus tubes. Below are some test data and the fit function I am using. Note that I am working on a logit(proportion) scale and that the final vertical scale is Log10(percentage). (* some test data *) data = Table[Null, {i, 4}]; data[[1]] = {{1, -5.8}, {2, -5.4}, {3, -0.8}, {4, -0.2}, {5, 4.6}, {1, -6.4}, {2, -5.6}, {3, -0.7}, {4, 0.04}, {5, 1.0}, {1, -6.8}, {2, -4.7}, {3, -1.