Skip to main content

Why doesn't repeated PatternSequence work with explicit pattern names?


Why would this work:


Clear[f]

f[a : PatternSequence[b_, c_]] := {a};
f[1, 2]
(* {1, 2} *)

and this also works:


Clear[f]
f[a : PatternSequence[_, _] ..] := {a};
f[1, 2, 3, 4]
(* {1, 2, 3, 4} *)


but this does not work?


Clear[f]
f[a : PatternSequence[b_, c_] ..] := {a};
f[1, 2, 3, 4]
(* f[1, 2, 3, 4] *)



Edit: Now that @RunnyKine's answer and @kguler's comment have perfectly answered my original question, I have another related question: is there a pattern-based way that I could extract the first element of the repeated pattern sequence without doing this?


Clear[fNew]
fNew[a : PatternSequence[_, _] ..] := Partition[{a}, 2][[All, 1]]

fNew[1, 2, 3, 4]
(* {1, 3} *)

Answer



This has nothing to do with PatternSequence rather the problem is with how you use Repeated (..). Take for example the following function definition:


f[x : {{_, _} ..}] := Norm[N[x]]

Now if we feed it the following input:


f[{{1, 1}, {1, 2}, {1, 3}}]

The function works as expected and yields:



4.07914333

Now let's redefine the function as follows (we use g instead)


g[x : {{a_, b_} ..}] := Norm[N[x]]

Now notice it looks just like f above but we've introduced the pattern objects a_ and b_


We feed it the same input as above:


g[{{1, 1}, {1, 2}, {1, 3}}]

And we get:



g[{{1, 1}, {1, 2}, {1, 3}}]

Well, strange, nothing happens. No match. Now let's try a different input, one where the first pair is repeated:


g[{{1, 1}, {1, 1}, {1, 1}}]

Now we get:


2.44948974

A different input with the first pair repeated:


g[{{1, 2}, {1, 2}, {1, 2}}]


Yields


3.87298335

So, you see that Repeated works in mysterious ways, well, not really. The point here is that, with no explicit pattern, you get a structural match (for lack of a better term) but with explicit pattern names you have to repeat terms just like the pattern describes. So for your last example, if you do:


f[1, 2, 1, 2]

You get:


{1, 2, 1, 2}


and


f[1, 2, 1, 2, 1, 2]

Gives:


{1, 2, 1, 2, 1, 2}

As expected.


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.