Skip to main content

programming - A pre-parsed HoldForm


HoldForm holds an expression's parsed form not its actual "inputted form" e.g.


 SetAttributes[AttemptedRespect, HoldAll];

AttemptedRespect[x_] := ExpressionCell[HoldForm@x, "Input"]

(assoc = <|f@x -> (x // g)|>) // AttemptedRespect


assoc = Association[f[x] -> g[x]]



where the held short forms/notation of Association/f/g are no longer respected.


To instigate respect:


 FleetingRespect[expr_] :=

(Unprotect@Association;
Format[Association[x__]] := <|x|>;
Format[f[x_]] := Prefix[f@x];
Format[g[x_]] := Postfix[x // g];
ExpressionCell[HoldForm@expr, "Input"])

and:


(assoc = <|f@x -> (x // g)|>) // FleetingRespect



assoc = <|f@x -> (x // g)|>



which is, of course, indeed fleeting:


(assoc = Association[(x // f) -> (g@x)]) // FleetingRespect


assoc = <|f@x -> (x // g)|>



Is there a way to cajole HoldForm into more faithfully respecting what she wraps?


In other words - a function PermanentRespect such that:



(assoc = <|f@x -> (x // g)|>) // PermanentRespect


assoc = <|f@x -> (x // g)|>



and


(assoc = Association[(x // f) -> (g@x)]) // PermanentRespect


assoc = Association[(x // f) -> (g@x)]




Yoh - Respect.


Answer: The final effort in Simon Rochester's answer almost creates a pre-parsed HoldForm (without touching $PreRead) and it certainly meets the use-case requirements that originally motivated the question. Essentially I wanted to programmatically generate the "natural input shortforms" with normal output form (without using any frontend manipulations).


MakeExpression[
RowBox@{"hf", "[", expr_, "]"} |
RowBox@{"hf", "@", expr_} |
RowBox@{expr_, "//", "hf"}, StandardForm] := HoldComplete@RawBoxes@expr;

SetAttributes[IOCells, HoldAll];


IOCells[expr_] := Grid[{
{ExpressionCell[expr, "Input", ShowStringCharacters -> True]},
{ExpressionCell[ToExpression@First@expr, "Output"]}},
Frame -> True,
Alignment -> Left,
Background -> {None, {1 -> GrayLevel[.9], 2 -> White}}];

and now both examples


Grid[{
{hf[assoc = <|f@x -> (x // g)|>],

hf[assoc = Association[(x // f) -> (g@x)]]}
}] // (Map[IOCells, #, {3}] &)

enter image description here


preserve input forms, respectively.



Answer



I think $PreRead may be your only hope (but see below). You can set it up with


$PreRead = (# /. 
RowBox@{"PermanentRespect", "[", expr_, "]"} |
RowBox@{"PermanentRespect", "@", expr_} |

RowBox@{expr_, "//", "PermanentRespect"} :>
RowBox@{"RawBoxes", "[", MakeBoxes@expr, "]"}
) &;

LoseRespect[expr_] := expr /. RawBoxes -> ToExpression

Now you can do


(assoc = <|f@x -> (x // g)|>) // PermanentRespect



(assoc = <|f@x -> (x // g)|>)



or


expr = PermanentRespect[(assoc = <|f@x -> (x // g)|>)]


(assoc = <|f@x -> (x // g)|>)



The expression hasn't been evaluated:


assoc



assoc



Evaluate it with LoseRespect:


LoseRespect[expr]


<|f[x] -> g[x]|>






Despite what I said above, I think $PreRead may not be your only hope. Here's another solution that uses NotebookRead to get the box representation of the currently evaluating cell. It then looks through those boxes to find the box representation of the call to itself, and returns that wrapped in RawBoxes.


(First clear $PreRead with $PreRead =. if the definition above is still active.)


Define PermanentRespect:


SetAttributes[PermanentRespect, HoldAll]

PermanentRespect[expr_] :=
First@Cases[
NotebookRead[EvaluationCell[]],
RowBox@{"PermanentRespect", "[", boxes_, "]"} |

RowBox@{"PermanentRespect", "@", boxes_} |
RowBox@{boxes_, "//", "PermanentRespect"} /;
MakeExpression[boxes, StandardForm] == HoldComplete[expr] :> RawBoxes[boxes],
Infinity
]

Now PermanentRespect gives the same results as obtained above.




I'm getting more wrong by the minute about $PreRead -- here's a third solution that employs a custom definition for MakeExpression, which is used whenever boxes are converted to expressions by the front end:


ClearAll[PermanentRespect]


MakeExpression[
RowBox@{"PermanentRespect", "[", expr_, "]"} |
RowBox@{"PermanentRespect", "@", expr_} |
RowBox@{expr_, "//", "PermanentRespect"},
StandardForm
] := HoldComplete@RawBoxes@expr

This also gives the same results as above.





Also, any of the above methods can be used with .m package files, if the package file is evaluated as a notebook instead of using Get. You can define


myGet[file_] := Module[{obj},
obj = NotebookOpen[file, Visible -> False];
NotebookEvaluate[obj];
NotebookClose[obj]
]

Then if the package file is loaded with myGet["package.m"], the PermanentRespect function calls inside the package will behave as above.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

plotting - How to draw lines between specified dots on ListPlot?

I would like to create a plot where I have unconnected dots and some connected. So far, I have figured out how to draw the dots. My code is the following: ListPlot[{{1, 1}, {2, 2}, {3, 3}, {4, 4}, {1, 4}, {2, 5}, {3, 6}, {4, 7}, {1, 7}, {2, 8}, {3, 9}, {4, 10}, {1, 10}, {2, 11}, {3, 12}, {4,13}, {2.5, 7}}, Ticks -> {{1, 2, 3, 4}, None}, AxesStyle -> Thin, TicksStyle -> Directive[Black, Bold, 12], Mesh -> Full] I have thought using ListLinePlot command, but I don't know how to specify to the command to draw only selected lines between the dots. Do have any suggestions/hints on how to do that? Thank you. Answer One possibility would be to use Epilog with Line : ListPlot[ {{1, 1}, {2, 2}, {3, 3}, {4, 4}, {1, 4}, {2, 5}, {3, 6}, {4, 7}, {1, 7}, {2, 8}, {3, 9}, {4, 10}, {1, 10}, {2, 11}, {3, 12}, {4, 13}, {2.5, 7}}, Ticks -> {{1, 2, 3, 4}, None}, AxesStyle -> Thin, TicksStyle -> Directive[Black, Bold, 12], Mesh -> Full, Epilog -> { Line[ ...

equation solving - Invert and fit implicitly defined curve

I need to fit an implicitly defined curve. I thought I could get some data out of Solve , and then using FindFit . Therefore, I would like to find the relation the parametric curve defined by $F(x,y)=0$: Solve[-(1/2) + 1/2 (0.41202 BesselK[0, 0.1 Sqrt[x^2 + y^2]] + (0.101483 x BesselK[1, 0.1 Sqrt[x^2 + y^2]])/Sqrt[x^2 + y^2]) == 0, y] But I can't get an output: Solve was unable to solve the system with inexact coefficients or the system obtained by direct rationalization of inexact numbers present in the system. Since many of the methods used by Solve require exact input, providing Solve with an exact version of the system may help. >> Edit: In particular, I would like to fit the data coming from the curve with the expression of another curve, and not with a function $f(x)$. In particular, since this clearly looks like a cardioid , I would like it to fit to something like it. What other strategies could I try?

dynamic - How can I make a clickable ArrayPlot that returns input?

I would like to create a dynamic ArrayPlot so that the rectangles, when clicked, provide the input. Can I use ArrayPlot for this? Or is there something else I should have to use? Answer ArrayPlot is much more than just a simple array like Grid : it represents a ranged 2D dataset, and its visualization can be finetuned by options like DataReversed and DataRange . These features make it quite complicated to reproduce the same layout and order with Grid . Here I offer AnnotatedArrayPlot which comes in handy when your dataset is more than just a flat 2D array. The dynamic interface allows highlighting individual cells and possibly interacting with them. AnnotatedArrayPlot works the same way as ArrayPlot and accepts the same options plus Enabled , HighlightCoordinates , HighlightStyle and HighlightElementFunction . data = {{Missing["HasSomeMoreData"], GrayLevel[ 1], {RGBColor[0, 1, 1], RGBColor[0, 0, 1], GrayLevel[1]}, RGBColor[0, 1, 0]}, {GrayLevel[0], GrayLevel...