Skip to main content

syntax - Different behaviours of Default Argument


I don't really understand the behaviour of Default Argument. If I execute this command in Mathematica:


In: {f[a], f[a + b]} /. f[x_ + y_.] -> p[x, y]



Out: {p[a, 0], p[b, a]}



Why is the a and b swapped?


How can I explain the different behaviour of the above compared with the each of the following:


In: {f[a], f[a + b]} /. f[x_ + y_] -> p[x, y]


Out: {f[a], p[a, b]}




In: {f[a], f[a + b]} /. f[x_. + y_] -> p[x, y]


Out: {p[0, a], p[a, b]}



In: {f[a], f[a + b]} /. f[x_. + y_.] -> p[x, y]


Out: {p[a, 0], p[a, b]}




And similarly for:


In: {f[a], f[a b]} /. f[x_ y_.] -> p[x, y]


Out: {p[a, 1], p[b, a]}



In: {f[a], f[a b]} /. f[x_  y_] -> p[x, y]


Out: {f[a], p[a, b]}




In: {f[a], f[a b]} /. f[x_. y_] -> p[x, y]


Out: {p[1, a], p[a, b]}



In: {f[a], f[a b]} /. f[x_. y_.] -> p[x, y]


Out: {p[a, 1], p[a, b]}




From Mathematica help, what I understand is that Mathematica will return the default value if the argument of _. is not inputted. But I still cannot make the above statements any sense. Besides the obvious observable output such as reordering, I don't really understand the logic behind _. How does it relate to sum and multiplication? When will _. be useful in other than this situation?


Thanks.



Answer



Good question. I see this was largely answered in the comments yesterday, but since no one posted a formal answer I shall.


Cases 2, 3, and 4 appear relatively straightforward. (Incidentally you should be using :>, RuleDelayed here, rather than ->, to localize the pattern names x and y.) The first case that swaps positions needs a closer look however. First, observe this case:


{f[c], f[c + b]} /. f[x_. + y_.] :> p[x, y]


{p[c, 0], p[b, c]}


This is because the LHS of /. is evaluated before matching, and f[c + b] evaluates to f[b + c]. This is because of the Orderless attribute of Plus.


Considering the first case, the RHS of /. is also evaluated, and again reordering (sorting) takes place:


Trace[
 {f[a], f[a + b]} /. f[x_ + y_.] :> p[x, y]
] // Column


{{{x_ + y_., y_. + x_}, f[y_. + x_]}, f[y_. + x_] :> p[x, y], f[y_. + x_] :> p[x, y]}
{f[a], f[a + b]} /. f[y_. + x_] :> p[x, y]

{p[a, 0], p[b, a]}

Here f[x_ + y_.] evaluates to f[y_. + x_]. You need to prevent the evaluation of Plus if you do not want this ordering to take place. On the left side this can be done with Unevaluated:


Unevaluated[{f[c], f[c + b]}] /. f[x_. + y_.] :> p[x, y]


{p[c, 0], p[c, b]}

It is however ineffective on the right side:


{f[a], f[a + b]} /. Unevaluated[f[x_ + y_.] :> p[x, y]]



{p[a, 0], p[b, a]}

Surprisingly, so is HoldPattern:


{f[a], f[a + b]} /. HoldPattern[f[x_ + y_.]] :> p[x, y]


{p[a, 0], p[b, a]}


I don't know why. Perhaps there is an evaluation leak within ReplaceAll that causes this to evaluate anyway, or more likely I am forgetting something about the interaction of pattern matching and the Orderless attribute.


Comments

Post a Comment

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[ ...
Post a Comment
Read more

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...
Post a Comment
Read more

Is there a way to do conditional matrix loop using 'continue'

I have the following: n = 3; m = 5; ww = RandomReal[{0, 0.1}, {n, n}]; uu = RandomReal[{0, 1}, {m, n}]; pp = RandomReal[{0, 1}, {n, n}]; ss = RandomInteger[{0, 5}, {m, n}]; Grid[{{"ww", "uu", "pp", "ss"}, {ww // TableForm, uu // TableForm, pp // TableForm, ss // TableForm}}, Spacings -> {5, 2}, Dividers -> All] where I would like to look at every element of matrix ss and produce a matrix tt , with zeroes at the locations in ss which have zeroes, and in all other positions do the following: tt = (-1/Subscript[ww, m]) Log[(1 - uu)/(Subscript[pp, m - 1])], where Subscript[ww, m] is the value at index of ww matrix and where Subscript[pp, m - 1] is the value at index-1 of pp matrix. So for example if the first value ever read from matrix ss happens to be 2, then value taken from matrix ww would be from the row 2, but from pp would be from row 1. Also how to tell difference between a 0 as a valid value from within the matrix elemen...
Post a Comment
Read more