Skip to main content

programming - How does thing["property"] syntax work?


Many builtin "things" support the (usually undocumented) syntax thing["property"], and usually the available properties can be listed using thing["Properties"] (thing["Methods"] might work too).


Examples include InterpolatingFunction, FittedModel, DateObject, a lot of mesh region stuff and FEM stuff.


These symbols act essentially like objects, used only as arguments to other functions that access their properties (e.g. PredictorFunction), or whose properties are accessible with DownValue syntax (e.g. ClassifierMeasurements).


Moreover, these functions, like PredictorFunction[] are returned with this frequently encountered DisplayForm:


enter image description here



These "object-like" symbols are typically (nested) Associations wrapped in their symbol, the FullForm of the PredictorFunction above is:


PredictorFunction[Association[Rule["Basic",Association[Rule["ExampleNumber",4],Rule["FeatureNumber",1],Rule["ScalarFeature",True]]],Rule["CommonFeaturePreprocessor",MachineLearning`PackageScope`Preprocessor["InputMissing",List[List[4]]]],Rule["PredictionPreprocessor",MachineLearning`PackageScope`Preprocessor["Standardize",List[5.25`,2.7233557730613653`]]],Rule["ProbabilityPostprocessor",Identity],Rule["Combiner",MachineLearning`PackageScope`Combiner["First"]],Rule["Decision",Association[Rule["Prior",Automatic],Rule["Utility",Function[DiracDelta[Plus[Slot[2],Times[-1,Slot[1]]]]]],Rule["Threshold",0],Rule["PerformanceGoal",Automatic]]],Rule["Models",List[Association[Rule["Method","LinearRegression"],Rule["Theta",List[List[0.`],List[0.9954921542867711`]]],Rule["DistributionData",List[NormalDistribution,List[0.11611695002854867`]]],Rule["L1Regularization",0],Rule["L2Regularization",0.00001`],Rule["ExtractedFeatureNumber",1],Rule["FeatureIndices",List[1]],Rule["FeaturePreprocessor",MachineLearning`PackageScope`Preprocessor["Sequence",List[MachineLearning`PackageScope`Preprocessor["Standardize",List[List[4.`],List[Times[2,Power[Rational[5,3],Rational[1,2]]]]]],MachineLearning`PackageScope`Preprocessor["PrependOne"]]]]]]],Rule["FeatureInformation",List[Association[Rule["Name","feature1"],Rule["Type","Numerical"],Rule["Sparsity",0.`],Rule["Quantiles",List[1,1,1,3,3,5,5,7,7]]]]],Rule["PredictionInformation",Association[Rule["Quantiles",List[2.`,2.`,2.`,4.5`,4.5`,6.`,6.`,8.5`,8.5`]],Rule["Name","value"],Rule["Sparsity",0.`]]],Rule["Options",List[Rule[Method,List[Rule[List[1],List["LinearRegression",Rule["L1Regularization",0],Rule["L2Regularization",0.00001`]]]]]]],Rule["Log",Association[Rule["TrainingTime",0.039456`],Rule["MaxTrainingMemory",186792],Rule["DataMemory",424],Rule["FunctionMemory",8936],Rule["LanguageVersion",List[10.1`,0]],Rule["Date","Tue 11 Aug 2015 18:32:58"],Rule["ProcessorCount",4],Rule["ProcessorType","x86-64"],Rule["OperatingSystem","MacOSX"],Rule["SystemWordLength",64],Rule["Events",List[Association[Rule["Event","ParseData"],Rule["StartTime",0.000109`2.1879414957726175],Rule["ElapsedTime",0.000446`],Rule["MaxMemoryUsed",15176],Rule["StartMemory",3096],Rule["EndMemory",4144]],Association[Rule["Event","TrainModel"],Rule["StartTime",0.001426`3.3046345233478402],Rule["ElapsedTime",0.037726`],Rule["MaxMemoryUsed",164080],Rule["StartMemory",9096],Rule["EndMemory",13824]]]]]]]]

How can I recreate this sort of functionality with my own objects and functions? Are there any methodologies for writing down-values of symbols like this?


Example:


Here's a mini demo of what I'm talking about:


c = note[<|"Pitch"->pitch[0],"Duration"->1|>];
e = note[<|"Pitch"->pitch[4],"Duration"->1|>];
g = note[<|"Pitch"->pitch[7],"Duration"->1|>];
cc = chord[<|"Notes"->{c,e,g}|>];


I'd have to do something ugly like this:


In[2]:= c_chord[property_String] := (c[[1]])[property]

To get this to work:


In[3]:= cc["Notes"]
Out[3]= {note[<|"Pitch" -> pitch[0], "Duration" -> 1|>], 
 note[<|"Pitch" -> pitch[4], "Duration" -> 1|>], 
 note[<|"Pitch" -> pitch[7], "Duration" -> 1|>]}

Answer





How can I recreate this sort of functionality with my own objects and functions? Are there any methodologies for writing down-values of symbols like this?



If you want to know how to get a similar output format, here's a silly toy example:


(* The icon isn't really that important *)
icon = Plot[Sin[x], {x, -5, 5}, Axes -> False, Frame -> True,
  ImageSize -> Dynamic[{Automatic, 3.5 (CurrentValue["FontCapHeight"] / AbsoluteCurrentValue[Magnification])}],
  GridLines -> None, FrameTicks -> None, AspectRatio -> 1,
  FrameStyle -> Directive[Opacity[0.5], Thickness[Tiny], RGBColor[0.368, 0.507, 0.71]]];


(* SummaryItemAnnotation and SummaryItem are the styles used in the labels *)
label[lbl_, v_] := Row[{Style[lbl <> ": ", "SummaryItemAnnotation"], Style[ToString[v], "SummaryItem"]}];

(* Set up formatting *)
BigStupidFunction /: MakeBoxes[ifun : BigStupidFunction[s1_, s2_, hs1_, hs2_], fmt_] :=
BoxForm`ArrangeSummaryBox[
  BigStupidFunction, ifun, icon,
  {label["Some stuff", s1], label["Other stuff", s2]},
  {label["Hidden stuff 1", hs1], label["Hidden stuff 2", hs2]},
  fmt

];

Now the output format of BigStupidFunction will be nicely boxed up like InterpolatingFunction.


enter image description here


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