I wish to make a replacement inside a held expression:
f[x_Real] := x^2;
Hold[{2., 3.}] /. n_Real :> f[n]
The desired output is Hold[{4., 9.}]
, but I get Hold[{f[2.], f[3.]}]
instead. What is the best way to make such a replacement without evaluation of the held expression?
Answer
Generally, you want the Trott-Strzebonski in-place evaluation technique:
f[x_Real]:=x^2;
Hold[{Hold[2.],Hold[3.]}]/.n_Real:>With[{eval = f[n]},eval/;True]
(* Hold[{Hold[4.],Hold[9.]}] *)
It will inject the evaluated r.h.s. into an arbitrarily deep location in the held expression, where the expression was found that matched the rule pattern. This is in contrast with Evaluate
, which is only effective on the first level inside Hold
(won't work in the example above). Note that you may evaluate some things and not evaluate others:
g[x_] := x^3;
Hold[{Hold[2.], Hold[3.]}] /. n_Real :> With[{eval = f[n]}, g[eval] /; True]
(* Hold[{Hold[g[4.]], Hold[g[9.]]}] *)
The basic idea is to exploit the semantics of rules with local variables shared between the body of With
and the condition, but within the context of local rules. Since the condition is True
, it forced the eval
variable to be evaluated inside the declaration part of With
, while the code inside the Condition
, here the body of With
(g[eval]
), is treated then as normally the r.h.s. of RuleDelayed
is. It is important that With
is used, since it can inject into unevaluated expressions. Module
and Block
also have the shared variable semantics, but wouldn't work here: while their declaration part would evaluate, they would not be able to communicate that result to their body that remains unevaluated (more precisely, only the part of the body that is inside Condition
will remain unevaluated - see below). The body of With
above was not evaluated either, however With
injects the evaluated part ( eval
here) into it - this is why the g function above remained unevaluated when the rule applied. This can be further illustrated by the following:
Hold[{Hold[2.],Hold[3.]}]/.n_Real:>Module[{eval=f[n]},
With[{eval = eval},g[eval]/;True]]
(* Hold[{Hold[g[4.]],Hold[g[9.]]}] *)
Note b.t.w. that only the part of code inside With
that is inside Condition
is considered a part of the "composite rule" and therefore not evaluated. So,
Hold[{Hold[2.],Hold[3.]}]/.n_Real:>Module[{eval = f[n]},
With[{eval = eval},Print[eval];g[eval]/;True]]
(* print: 4. *)
(* print: 9. *)
(* Hold[{Hold[g[4.]],Hold[g[9.]]}] *)
But
Hold[{Hold[2.],Hold[3.]}]/.n_Real:>Module[{eval = f[n]},
With[{eval = eval},(Print[eval];g[eval])/;True]]
(* Hold[{Hold[Print[4.];g[4.]],Hold[Print[9.];g[9.]]}] *)
This should further clarify this mechanism.
Comments
Post a Comment