Skip to main content

function construction - A question about two ways to use Default


Usually we define a function with default values by the syntax x_:default, but there is another technique to do this by registering a global default value with Default. In the Document, there are three ways to use Default, two of which have confused me.


The document tells that




Default[f,i] gives the default value to use when _. appears as the i-th argument of f



, while



Default[f,i,n] gives the default value for the i-th argument out of a total of n arguments



. Therefore, I have tried the following comparison:


Default[f, 1] = a1;
Default[f, 2] = a2;

Default[f, 3] = a3;
f[x_., y_., z_.] := {x, y, z}
{f[], f[1], f[1, 2], f[1, 2, 3]}

The result is {{a1, a2, a3}, {1, a2, a3}, {1, 2, a3}, {1, 2, 3}}.


ClearAll[f];
Default[f, 1, 3] = a1;
Default[f, 2, 3] = a2;
Default[f, 3, 3] = a3;
f[x_., y_., z_.] := {x, y, z}

{f[], f[1], f[1, 2], f[1, 2, 3]}

This give the same result.


It seems that there is no difference between these two ways to use Default. If there were no difference, why would the document list the two ways?


I'd appreciate it if someone could provide some information.



Answer



The third parameter allows control of Optional behavior for multiple function definitions. It is not attached to the number of actual arguments passed to the function but rather to the number of arguments that appear in the function definition itself. Consider this example:


ClearAll[f];

Default[f, 1, 3] = a1;

Default[f, 2, 3] = a2;
Default[f, 3, 3] = a3;
f[x_., y_., z_.] := {x, y, z}

Default[f, 1, 2] = Q;
Default[f, 2, 2] = R;
f[x_., Optional[y_Symbol]] := foo[x, y]

Now:


{f[], f[1], f[1, 2], f[1, 2, 3]}



{foo[Q, R], foo[1, R], {1, 2, a3}, {1, 2, 3}}

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

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}]
Post a Comment
Read more