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

front end - keyboard shortcut to invoke Insert new matrix

I frequently need to type in some matrices, and the menu command Insert > Table/Matrix > New... allows matrices with lines drawn between columns and rows, which is very helpful. I would like to make a keyboard shortcut for it, but cannot find the relevant frontend token command (4209405) for it. Since the FullForm[] and InputForm[] of matrices with lines drawn between rows and columns is the same as those without lines, it's hard to do this via 3rd party system-wide text expanders (e.g. autohotkey or atext on mac). How does one assign a keyboard shortcut for the menu item Insert > Table/Matrix > New... , preferably using only mathematica? Thanks! Answer In the MenuSetup.tr (for linux located in the $InstallationDirectory/SystemFiles/FrontEnd/TextResources/X/ directory), I changed the line MenuItem["&New...", "CreateGridBoxDialog"] to read MenuItem["&New...", "CreateGridBoxDialog", MenuKey["m", Modifiers-...
Post a Comment
Read more

How to thread a list

I have data in format data = {{a1, a2}, {b1, b2}, {c1, c2}, {d1, d2}} Tableform: I want to thread it to : tdata = {{{a1, b1}, {a2, b2}}, {{a1, c1}, {a2, c2}}, {{a1, d1}, {a2, d2}}} Tableform: And I would like to do better then pseudofunction[n_] := Transpose[{data2[[1]], data2[[n]]}]; SetAttributes[pseudofunction, Listable]; Range[2, 4] // pseudofunction Here is my benchmark data, where data3 is normal sample of real data. data3 = Drop[ExcelWorkBook[[Column1 ;; Column4]], None, 1]; data2 = {a #, b #, c #, d #} & /@ Range[1, 10^5]; data = RandomReal[{0, 1}, {10^6, 4}]; Here is my benchmark code kptnw[list_] := Transpose[{Table[First@#, {Length@# - 1}], Rest@#}, {3, 1, 2}] &@list kptnw2[list_] := Transpose[{ConstantArray[First@#, Length@# - 1], Rest@#}, {3, 1, 2}] &@list OleksandrR[list_] := Flatten[Outer[List, List@First[list], Rest[list], 1], {{2}, {1, 4}}] paradox2[list_] := Partition[Riffle[list[[1]], #], 2] & /@ Drop[list, 1] RM[list_] := FoldList[Transpose[{First@li...
Post a Comment
Read more

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