Skip to main content

Evaluation leak from Dynamic in Button's action 


a = 1;


Button["Print", a++]
Button["Print", Dynamic[a++]]
Button["Print", Dynamic[a++];]
Button["Print", {Dynamic[a++]}]

Dynamic @ a

The second Button is not supposed to change the value of a but it does.


Have I missed something or is it a bug?




Why it is not supposed to?



Button[label,action] [...] evaluates action whenever it is clicked.



Evaluation is supposed to leave Dynamic intakt and if it is part of returned result MakeBoxes will create DynamicBox which is supposed to be handled by FrontEnd which should send contents to evaluation when needed.


Yet the Button isn't creating any visible result when clicked.



While Button["Print", Dynamic[a++]] isn't useful in general, the leak is the leak.




A support case with the identification [CASE:3609709] was created


[...] I have filed an incident report with the information you provided.


[...] I have also filed a second incident report for the documentation example [...]




Answer



To understand this, look at the typesetting:


In[1]:= ToBoxes[Button["Print", Dynamic[a++]]] // InputForm

Out[1]//InputForm=
ButtonBox["\"Print\"", ButtonFunction :> Dynamic[a++], Appearance -> Automatic, 

 Evaluator -> Automatic, Method -> "Preemptive"]

Front end options, which includes all box options, can take Dynamic heads. That basically means that the FE will compute the value of the Dynamic and use it for the option. And that it will be updated whenever a Dynamic dependency updates.


Because Button is passing its second argument unmolested to the right-hand side of ButtonFunction, it looks like a Dynamic rhs which needs to be computed by the FE. And that computation increments a++.


At first, I was surprised that it didn't increment by virtue of simply being displayed on the screen. I.e., I might have expected a to be 2 even before you pressed the button. As it turns out, it doesn't because it's in a class of options which are treated as always held, until they're actually used. Other such options include the Initialization, Deinitialization, and TrackedSymbols options of various boxes. And too many more to list, but only a small number of the overall number of options.


So, is it a bug? Maybe. These "always-held" options certainly don't gain any benefit from Dynamic handling. However, if we added special handling for them, then we'd have to list all of the options and document why they're excluded from standard Dynamic handling, which I think would be burdensome for everyone. I think I would lean towards calling it not a bug.


I think the better thing in this case would be to properly document that the second argument of Button is passed to ButtonBoxOptions->ButtonFunction.


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

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

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}]
Post a Comment
Read more

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....
Post a Comment
Read more