Skip to main content

dynamic - A good way to manage code in a complicated CDF?


When doing complicated programming in a Mma notebook I define several functions that I use in my higher level funtions, and I use a "Subsection" cell for each definition. For example I might write:


Cell["foo[x,y]", "Subsection"]
foo[x_,y_]:=(* complicated code *)


Cell["foo[x,y,z]", "Subsection"]
foo[x_,y_,z_]:=(* complicated code *)

Cell["goo[x,y]", "Subsection"]
goo[x_,y_]:=(* complicated code *)

Cell["UserIterface[x,y,z]", "Subsection"]
UserInterface[x_,y_,z_]:=DynamicModule[{a,b,c},
  a=foo[x,y];

  b=foo[x,y,z];
  c=goo[x,y];
  (* and so on  *)
]

By using "Subsection" cells, I can close Subsections of code when I don't need to see them. However, I want to make my program a CDF that the CDF-Player can use. As far as I know, I have to use the following approach instead.


DynamicModule[{a,b,c},
a=foo[x,y];
b=foo[x,y,z];
c=goo[x,y];

(* and so on  *),

Initialization:>{
foo[x_,y_]:=(* complicated code *);
foo[x_,y_,z_]:=(* complicated code *);
goo[x_,y_]:=(* complicated code *)}
]

This becomes unwieldly because I can't minimize the code that I don't need to see at any moment. Is there a better way to make a complicated CDF?



Answer




It is not necessary to put all your functions into the DynamicModule/Manipulate when deploying to CDF: you can use SaveDefinitions -> True to collect function definitions from other cells or even from packages, though only for non-free CDFs, that can be opened only with Mathematica or Player Pro. If deploying for the web or for the free CDF Player, the situation is not that simple. For security reasons, SaveDefinitions won't grab all functions defined in other cells or packages, especially since some functionality is disallowed in the free CDF version.


Also note, that CDF's don't evaluate cells in the order they appear, i.e. initialization cels are not evaluated before everything else! Accordingly, all content for a CDF (if it is outside of the Manipulate/DynamicModule) should be in the same dynamic cell, where the actual dynamic CDF content resides, to make sure they got evaluated together.


See full discussion of these issues here: Understanding CDF, especially point 2: Save definitions.


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

mathematical optimization - Minimizing using indices, error: Part::pkspec1: The expression cannot be used as a part specification

I want to use Minimize where the variables to minimize are indices pointing into an array. Here a MWE that hopefully shows what my problem is. vars = u@# & /@ Range[3]; cons = Flatten@ { Table[(u[j] != #) & /@ vars[[j + 1 ;; -1]], {j, 1, 3 - 1}], 1 vec1 = {1, 2, 3}; vec2 = {1, 2, 3}; Minimize[{Total@((vec1[[#]] - vec2[[u[#]]])^2 & /@ Range[1, 3]), cons}, vars, Integers] The error I get: Part::pkspec1: The expression u[1] cannot be used as a part specification. >> Answer Ok, it seems that one can get around Mathematica trying to evaluate vec2[[u[1]]] too early by using the function Indexed[vec2,u[1]] . The working MWE would then look like the following: vars = u@# & /@ Range[3]; cons = Flatten@{ Table[(u[j] != #) & /@ vars[[j + 1 ;; -1]], {j, 1, 3 - 1}], 1 vec1 = {1, 2, 3}; vec2 = {1, 2, 3}; NMinimize[ {Total@((vec1[[#]] - Indexed[vec2, u[#]])^2 & /@ R...
Post a Comment
Read more

functions - Get leading series expansion term?

Given a function f[x] , I would like to have a function leadingSeries that returns just the leading term in the series around x=0 . For example: leadingSeries[(1/x + 2)/(4 + 1/x^2 + x)] x and leadingSeries[(1/x + 2 + (1 - 1/x^3)/4)/(4 + x)] -(1/(16 x^3)) Is there such a function in Mathematica? Or maybe one can implement it efficiently? EDIT I finally went with the following implementation, based on Carl Woll 's answer: lds[ex_,x_]:=( (ex/.x->(x+O[x]^2))/.SeriesData[U_,Z_,L_List,Mi_,Ma_,De_]:>SeriesData[U,Z,{L[[1]]},Mi,Mi+1,De]//Quiet//Normal) The advantage is, that this one also properly works with functions whose leading term is a constant: lds[Exp[x],x] 1 Answer Update 1 Updated to eliminate SeriesData and to not return additional terms Perhaps you could use: leadingSeries[expr_, x_] := Normal[expr /. x->(x+O[x]^2) /. a_List :> Take[a, 1]] Then for your examples: leadingSeries[(1/x + 2)/(4 + 1/x^2 + x), x] leadingSeries[Exp[x], x] leadingSeries[(1/x + 2 + (1 - 1/x...
Post a Comment
Read more

What is and isn't a valid variable specification for Manipulate?

I have an expression whose terms have arguments (representing subscripts), like this: myExpr = A[0] + V[1,T] I would like to put it inside a Manipulate to see its value as I move around the parameters. (The goal is eventually to plot it wrt one of the variables inside.) However, Mathematica complains when I set V[1,T] as a manipulated variable: Manipulate[Evaluate[myExpr], {A[0], 0, 1}, {V[1, T], 0, 1}] (*Manipulate::vsform: Manipulate argument {V[1,T],0,1} does not have the correct form for a variable specification. >> *) As a workaround, if I get rid of the symbol T inside the argument, it works fine: Manipulate[ Evaluate[myExpr /. T -> 15], {A[0], 0, 1}, {V[1, 15], 0, 1}] Why this behavior? Can anyone point me to the documentation that says what counts as a valid variable? And is there a way to get Manpiulate to accept an expression with a symbolic argument as a variable? Investigations I've done so far: I tried using variableQ from this answer , but it says V[1...
Post a Comment
Read more