Skip to main content

programming - Is there anything like a C pointer (or returning a reference) in $Mathematica$?


I want to do in Mathematica what the following does in C.


int array[7] = {0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0};

int& foo(size_t idx)
{
return array[idx];
}


foo(4) = 43;

// array should now be {0, 0, 0, 0, 43, 0, 0}

In other words, I'd like to use = to assign to a reference (to some variable outside the scope of the function) returned by a function.


I did read a few threads about references, but it seemed I'd have to "overload" the = operator (if that's even possible) to make things work.




Background


I wouldn't be surprised if such practice were discouraged in Mathematica, but would still appreciate the knowledge, as well as alternatives. My motivation for this is in trying to write a tool for non-programmers (or those with mostly C backgrounds but completely unfamiliar to Mathematica) for rapid testing of hypotheses, and the tool must be intuitive, familiar, and easy to pick up (else I'm afraid my pitch to use Mathematica wouldn't gain traction). To be more specific, the tool would analyze time-series data, the user specifying an expression to be run per time-step; and that expression would have "access" to a (pseudo-)array, say, price, such that price[0] refers to the current price, price[-1] refers to the previous price, etc.—so price[0] refers to a different price at each timestep. Of course C doesn't allow negative indexing; I just thought it'd be most intuitive that way—so my plan was to implement price as a function, and retrieve values from an array behind-the-scenes. You can probably see already where this is going: I'd also like for users to be able to assign to price[0], and that's where I'm stuck. I know I could (and perhaps should) just write a separate function like set_price[0, val], but this would take away from the aesthetic goal I'm trying to achieve to win everyone over.


I'm open to alternative ideas that may keep aesthetic though not in the same way.




Answer



Have a look at UpValues:


ClearAll[price];
l = ConstantArray[0, 10];
pos = 5;
price[i_] := l[[pos + i]]
price /: (price[i_] = val_) := (l[[pos + i]] = val)

price[0]=-1;
price[{-2,-1,1}]={1,2,3};


l
(* {0, 0, 1, 2, -1, 3, 0, 0, 0, 0} *)

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

mathematical optimization - Minimizing using indices, error: Part::pkspec1: The expression cannot be used as a part specification

I want to use Minimize where the variables to minimize are indices pointing into an array. Here a MWE that hopefully shows what my problem is. vars = u@# & /@ Range[3]; cons = Flatten@ { Table[(u[j] != #) & /@ vars[[j + 1 ;; -1]], {j, 1, 3 - 1}], 1 vec1 = {1, 2, 3}; vec2 = {1, 2, 3}; Minimize[{Total@((vec1[[#]] - vec2[[u[#]]])^2 & /@ Range[1, 3]), cons}, vars, Integers] The error I get: Part::pkspec1: The expression u[1] cannot be used as a part specification. >> Answer Ok, it seems that one can get around Mathematica trying to evaluate vec2[[u[1]]] too early by using the function Indexed[vec2,u[1]] . The working MWE would then look like the following: vars = u@# & /@ Range[3]; cons = Flatten@{ Table[(u[j] != #) & /@ vars[[j + 1 ;; -1]], {j, 1, 3 - 1}], 1 vec1 = {1, 2, 3}; vec2 = {1, 2, 3}; NMinimize[ {Total@((vec1[[#]] - Indexed[vec2, u[#]])^2 & /@ R...

functions - Get leading series expansion term?

Given a function f[x] , I would like to have a function leadingSeries that returns just the leading term in the series around x=0 . For example: leadingSeries[(1/x + 2)/(4 + 1/x^2 + x)] x and leadingSeries[(1/x + 2 + (1 - 1/x^3)/4)/(4 + x)] -(1/(16 x^3)) Is there such a function in Mathematica? Or maybe one can implement it efficiently? EDIT I finally went with the following implementation, based on Carl Woll 's answer: lds[ex_,x_]:=( (ex/.x->(x+O[x]^2))/.SeriesData[U_,Z_,L_List,Mi_,Ma_,De_]:>SeriesData[U,Z,{L[[1]]},Mi,Mi+1,De]//Quiet//Normal) The advantage is, that this one also properly works with functions whose leading term is a constant: lds[Exp[x],x] 1 Answer Update 1 Updated to eliminate SeriesData and to not return additional terms Perhaps you could use: leadingSeries[expr_, x_] := Normal[expr /. x->(x+O[x]^2) /. a_List :> Take[a, 1]] Then for your examples: leadingSeries[(1/x + 2)/(4 + 1/x^2 + x), x] leadingSeries[Exp[x], x] leadingSeries[(1/x + 2 + (1 - 1/x...

What is and isn't a valid variable specification for Manipulate?

I have an expression whose terms have arguments (representing subscripts), like this: myExpr = A[0] + V[1,T] I would like to put it inside a Manipulate to see its value as I move around the parameters. (The goal is eventually to plot it wrt one of the variables inside.) However, Mathematica complains when I set V[1,T] as a manipulated variable: Manipulate[Evaluate[myExpr], {A[0], 0, 1}, {V[1, T], 0, 1}] (*Manipulate::vsform: Manipulate argument {V[1,T],0,1} does not have the correct form for a variable specification. >> *) As a workaround, if I get rid of the symbol T inside the argument, it works fine: Manipulate[ Evaluate[myExpr /. T -> 15], {A[0], 0, 1}, {V[1, 15], 0, 1}] Why this behavior? Can anyone point me to the documentation that says what counts as a valid variable? And is there a way to get Manpiulate to accept an expression with a symbolic argument as a variable? Investigations I've done so far: I tried using variableQ from this answer , but it says V[1...