Skip to main content

replacement - Safely nesting RuleDelayed


Say I have the following, straightforward-seeming functions:


makeARuleDelayed[a_, b_] :=
With[{anotherRule = makeAnotherRuleDelayed[b]},
v : a[b] :> ((v == 1 - v) /. anotherRule)];

makeAnotherRuleDelayed[x_] :=
v : h_[x] :> foo[h, x];

If I use them to create a RuleDelayed, I get an error message:




a[b] /. makeARuleDelayed[a, b]

RuleDelayed::rhs: Pattern v$:h$_[b] appears on the right-hand side of rule v$:a[b]:>(v$==1-v$/. v$:h$_[b]:>foo[h$,b]) .



Examining the result indicates the problem:


v$ : a[b] :> (v$ == 1 - v$ /. v$ : h$_[b] :> foo[h$, b])

Using this rule fails in about the way you'd expect it to. The only workaround I could think of is adding a Module to the body of makeAnotherRule:


makeAnotherRuleDelayed[x_] :=

Module[{v},
v : h_[x] :> foo[h, x]]

This doesn't help at all; evidently there must be some sort of magical renaming going on somewhere inside of RuleDelayed that truncates the $nnn part of the name of the symbol generated by Module.


Without being able to nest rules without name clashes, I'm not sure how to go about creating nontrivial rules programmatically.



Answer



This is a renaming mechanism at work. I think, the "canonical" way to fool it is something like this:


makeARuleDelayed[a_, b_] :=
With[{anotherRule = makeAnotherRuleDelayed[b]},
v : a[b] :> ((v == 1 - v) /. anotherRule)];


makeAnotherRuleDelayed[x_] :=
RuleDelayed @@ Hold[v : h_[x], foo[h, x]];

By using RuleDelayed@@Hold, we fool the renaming mechanism of With. Note that this whole issue is because With is a scoping construct which cares about inner scoping constructs and possible name collisions. You can use rules instead, which are much more intruding:


Clear[makeARuleDelayedAlt];
makeARuleDelayedAlt[a_, b_] :=
v : a[b] :> ((v == 1 - v) /. makeAnotherRuleDelayed[b])

and then keep the original definition for makeAnotherRuleDelayed. I discussed these issues in more detail here.



Comments

Popular posts from this blog

plotting - Filling between two spheres in SphericalPlot3D

Manipulate[ SphericalPlot3D[{1, 2 - n}, {θ, 0, Pi}, {ϕ, 0, 1.5 Pi}, Mesh -> None, PlotPoints -> 15, PlotRange -> {-2.2, 2.2}], {n, 0, 1}] I cant' seem to be able to make a filling between two spheres. I've already tried the obvious Filling -> {1 -> {2}} but Mathematica doesn't seem to like that option. Is there any easy way around this or ... Answer There is no built-in filling in SphericalPlot3D . One option is to use ParametricPlot3D to draw the surfaces between the two shells: Manipulate[ Show[SphericalPlot3D[{1, 2 - n}, {θ, 0, Pi}, {ϕ, 0, 1.5 Pi}, PlotPoints -> 15, PlotRange -> {-2.2, 2.2}], ParametricPlot3D[{ r {Sin[t] Cos[1.5 Pi], Sin[t] Sin[1.5 Pi], Cos[t]}, r {Sin[t] Cos[0 Pi], Sin[t] Sin[0 Pi], Cos[t]}}, {r, 1, 2 - n}, {t, 0, Pi}, PlotStyle -> Yellow, Mesh -> {2, 15}]], {n, 0, 1}]

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}]

plotting - Mathematica: 3D plot based on combined 2D graphs

I have several sigmoidal fits to 3 different datasets, with mean fit predictions plus the 95% confidence limits (not symmetrical around the mean) and the actual data. I would now like to show these different 2D plots projected in 3D as in but then using proper perspective. In the link here they give some solutions to combine the plots using isometric perspective, but I would like to use proper 3 point perspective. Any thoughts? Also any way to show the mean points per time point for each series plus or minus the standard error on the mean would be cool too, either using points+vertical bars, or using spheres plus tubes. Below are some test data and the fit function I am using. Note that I am working on a logit(proportion) scale and that the final vertical scale is Log10(percentage). (* some test data *) data = Table[Null, {i, 4}]; data[[1]] = {{1, -5.8}, {2, -5.4}, {3, -0.8}, {4, -0.2}, {5, 4.6}, {1, -6.4}, {2, -5.6}, {3, -0.7}, {4, 0.04}, {5, 1.0}, {1, -6.8}, {2, -4.7}, {3, -1.