Skip to main content

programming - How to construct custom operators with precedence?


I need to combine data structures in operations analogous to addition, subtraction, multiplication and division (and more). I need more than one operation of each type, i.e. more than one method of addition, subtraction, etc. I have made some progress. Using the Notation palette, i can for example define !/! and %/% as different operators for division. But how can I set precedence? My impression is that this is not possible. I have explored the existing symbols without in-built meanings, such as CirclePlus and CircleMinus. These symbols without in-built meanings have precedence while allowing the meaning to be defined by the user. But I can't find enough of them to meet my needs. For example, there is no "CircleDivide".


Might it be possible to use subscripts and have $/_a$ and $/_b$ for different types of division while retaining the precedence of the division operator? If I could do it for division, then I could do it for the other operators of interest too.


ADDENDUM: I've made some progress following the clue provided by Mr.Wizard. The following code creates subscripted operators for operations analogous to +,-,*,/. The conv functions are highly simplified for test purposes and in the actual application would perform operations on data structures.


In[1]:= conv[x_, y_, op_ /; op == "+" || op == "-"] := Module[{},
If[op == "-", Return[conv[x, -y, "+"]]]; x + y]


conv[x_, y_, op_ /; op == "*" || op == "/"] := Module[{},
If[op == "/", Return[conv[x, 1/y, "*"]]]; x y]

MakeExpression[RowBox[{x_, SubscriptBox["+", "i"], y_}], StandardForm] :=
MakeExpression[RowBox[{"conv", "[", x, ",", y, ",", "\"+\"", "]"}], StandardForm]
MakeExpression[RowBox[{x_, SubscriptBox["-", "i"], y_}], StandardForm] :=
MakeExpression[RowBox[{"conv", "[", x, ",", y, ",", "\"-\"", "]"}], StandardForm]
MakeExpression[RowBox[{x_, SubscriptBox["*", "i"], y_}], StandardForm] :=
MakeExpression[RowBox[{"conv", "[", x, ",", y, ",", "\"*\"", "]"}], StandardForm]

MakeExpression[RowBox[{x_, SubscriptBox["/", "i"], y_}], StandardForm] :=
MakeExpression[RowBox[{"conv", "[", x, ",", y, ",", "\"/\"", "]"}], StandardForm]

Testing the code, it works at least up to a point and the subscripted operators appear to have the same precedence as the parent operators (+,*, etc.):


test 1


However, if I remove the parentheses from the second test expression, I get an error message. Why is that occurring and how do I fix it?


test 2



Answer



The construction of custom operators with precedence is described in the Complex Patterns and Advanced Features Notation Package Tutorial. More general informations can be found in Precedence of Operators in Notations.


The following operator definitions work for the examples given in the question.

First loading the Notation Package:


Needs["Notation`"]

Now I'll add an InputAlias for each operator, although this increases the convenience only for $-_i$ significantly.


AddInputAlias["+i" -> ParsedBoxWrapper[SubscriptBox["+", "i"]]]

AddInputAlias["*i" -> ParsedBoxWrapper[SubscriptBox["*", "i"]]]

AddInputAlias["/i" -> ParsedBoxWrapper[SubscriptBox["/", "i"]]]


AddInputAlias["-i" -> ParsedBoxWrapper[
TagBox[SubscriptBox["-", "i"], Minus, SyntaxForm -> "a"]]]

Using the Notation Palette this looks like AddInputAlias First I'll define the infix operators with some not yet defined functions


InfixNotation[ParsedBoxWrapper[SubscriptBox["+", "i"]], myPlus]

InfixNotation[ParsedBoxWrapper[SubscriptBox["*", "i"]], myTimes]

InfixNotation[ParsedBoxWrapper[SubscriptBox["/", "i"]], myDivision]


InfixNotation[ParsedBoxWrapper[
TagBox[SubscriptBox["-", "i"], Minus, SyntaxForm -> "a"]], myMinus]

InfixNotation


For a first test, your testing code in a copyable format


\!\(\(9 \*TagBox[SubscriptBox["-", "i"],Minus,SyntaxForm->"a"] 2\*SubscriptBox[\(*\), \(i\)]3\)\*SubscriptBox[\(+\), \(i\)]\(4\*SubscriptBox[\(/\), \(i\)]2\)\)

\!\(4\*SubscriptBox[\(+\), \(i\)]\(6\*SubscriptBox[\(*\), \(i\)]2\*SubscriptBox[\(/\), \(i\)]4\)\)

which can be easily typed in using the InputAliases or the Subscript keyboard shortcut (Ctrl+_) for the ones without a TagBox and will look (together with their output) like



Test1


The output of the first test example nicely shows the correct parenthesization.


Finally the placeholder functions are defined as


myPlus = Plus;
myMinus[a_, b_] := Plus[a, Times[-1, b]]
myTimes[a_, b_] := Times[a, b]
myDivision = Divide;

and the examples tested again


\!\(\(9 \*TagBox[SubscriptBox["-", "i"],Minus,SyntaxForm->"a"] 2 \*SubscriptBox[\(*\), \(i\)]3\)\*SubscriptBox[\(+\), \(i\)]\(4 \*SubscriptBox[\(/\), \(i\)]2\)\)


\!\(4\*SubscriptBox[\(+\), \(i\)]\(6\*SubscriptBox[\(*\), \(i\)]2 \*SubscriptBox[\(/\), \(i\)]4\)\)

\!\(\((9 \*TagBox[SubscriptBox["-", "i"],Minus,SyntaxForm->"a"] 2 \*SubscriptBox[\(*\), \(i\)]3)\)\*SubscriptBox[\(+\), \(i\)]\(4 \*SubscriptBox[\(/\), \(i\)]2\)\)

Test2


As described in the tutorials linked to at the beginning of this answer, the SyntaxForm option of TagBox can be used to change the precedence of an operator. For the given examples this is only needed for $-_i$, because for the other operators it is determined by their corresponding operators without a subscript. For $-_i$ the precedence has to be changed, because otherwise everything following $-_i$ is parenthesized as one part. Using SyntaxForm -> "a" the precedence behavior is "group as a symbol".


Just to illustrate the wrong parenthesization, when the precedence behavior is "group as infix minus operator":


ClearAll[myPlus, myPlus, myDivision, myMinus]
RemoveInfixNotation[ParsedBoxWrapper[

TagBox[SubscriptBox["-", "i"], Minus, SyntaxForm -> "a"]], myMinus]

InfixNotation[ParsedBoxWrapper[
TagBox[SubscriptBox["-", "i"], Minus, SyntaxForm -> "a-b"]], myMinus]

\!\(9\*TagBox[SubscriptBox["-", "i"],Minus,SyntaxForm->"a-b"]\(2\*SubscriptBox[\(*\), \(i\)]3\)\*SubscriptBox[\(+\), \(i\)]\(4\*SubscriptBox[\(/\), \(i\)]2\)\)

wrongParenthesization


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...