Skip to main content

function construction - Clean and handy Options management/filtering


the case


I want to be able to create a function with some default options but also without need to add full explicit list of options available for it.


And then inside I want to be able to filter from given and default options, those which are Button options or Tooltip options for example.


So something like:


Options[f] = {(*list of default options*)}


f[args__, OptionsPattern[]]:=Column[{
(*Options that are suitable for Button*),
(*Options that are suitable for Tooltip*),
OptionValue[(*specific name*)]
}]

And I wasn't able to get this with built in Options management functions: OptionsPattern[], OptionValue, FilterRules etc.


additional requirements





  1. I want to avoid Options[f] = Join[customOptions, Options[Button], ...].


    I don't think is a good solution, there may be duplicates in customOptions for them and an explicit list of Options[f] grows.




  2. I want to be able to provide any option to the function without error messsage e.g.: Unknown option Apparance for f...




  3. We can get 2. by skipping OptionsPattern[] in definition but without it we can't use built in OptionValue. I want to be able to refer to functions by their names.





  4. Rules filtering mechanism should not produce duplicates. I know Button[..., ImageSize->300, ImageSize->200] will behave stable but I find it ugly.




my approach


(* auxiliary functions *)

mergeRules = GatherBy[Join[##], First][[All, 1]] &;

optionValue = #2 /. # &;


(* function definition *)

ClearAll[f];
Options[f] = {"Test" -> 1, ImageSize -> 100, TooltipDelay -> 20};

f[x_, optionsPattern : (_Rule | _RuleDelayed) ...] := With[{
opt = mergeRules[{optionsPattern}, Options[f]]}
,
Column@{
FilterRules[opt, Options@Button],

FilterRules[opt, Options@Tooltip],
optionValue[opt, "Test"]
}
]

So I need to start my definitions with With[{ opt = mergeRules[ {optionsPattern}, Options[f]]}, which does not seem to be a big problem, but why I have to do this?


tests


f[1, Appearance -> "Palette"]



{Appearance->Palette, ImageSize->100} 
{TooltipDelay->20}
1

f[1, ImageSize -> 200]


{ImageSize->200}
{TooltipDelay->20}
1


f[1]


{ImageSize->100}
{TooltipDelay->20}
1

question


Is there simpler approach, with built functions maybe? Or should I include Options[Button] etc. to Options[f] and count on the fact that when given duplicates, first one wins?



Edits


Mr.Wizard's answer fulfills points:


1 automatically, 2/3 by using OptionsPattern[{f,Button, ...}]. So still 4 needs custom filtering function but it is a good answer anyway.




Comments

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}]

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 - 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....