Skip to main content

formatting - What is the most convenient way to read definitions of in-memory symbols when we don't have the source files? (Spelunking tools)


Note: I put Simon's implementation on GitHub. Contributions welcome!





When trying to read the definition of already defined (package or built-in) symbols using Information or FullDefinition, the biggest inconvenience is that lots of distracting private context names appear in front of all symbol names.


Currently I am using a little function contextFreeDefinition[] to avoid this problem. It will attempt to hide the most frequently appearing context name in the definition. contextFreeDefinition[] is based on this answer.


Compare for example ClearAttributes[RunThrough, ReadProtected]; Information[RunThrough] and contextFreeDefinition[RunThrough]. The latter is a lot less cluttered because the System`Dump` context is hidden in the definition. (I usually paste the output of this function into Workbench and re-indent it using the Source -> Format context menu item for better readability)




Unfortunately contextFreeDefinition[] does not always successfully hide contexts, for example try the following:


ImportString["1", "List"]; (* force Stub symbols to be loaded *)

System`Convert`TableDump`ImportList // contextFreeDefinition


and notice that several symbols (especially patterns) still have System`Convert`TableDump` prepended. For example, I see the following in the FullDefinition it prints:


protectRegEx[System`Convert`TableDump`s_String] := 
StringReplace[System`Convert`TableDump`s, $ProtectedCharacterRules]

The symbol System`Convert`TableDump`s still has the context name prepended even though the function tried to hide exactly this context.


Question: How can contextFreeDefinition[] be fixed so it always hides the context, or what other alternative approaches are there to read the definitions of in-memory symbols?




The code of contextFreeDefinition[].


Clear[commonestContexts, contextFreeDefinition]


commonestContexts[sym_Symbol, n_: 1] := Quiet[
Commonest[
Cases[Level[DownValues[sym], {-1}, HoldComplete],
s_Symbol /; FreeQ[$ContextPath, Context[s]] :> Context[s]], n],
Commonest::dstlms]

contextFreeDefinition::contexts = "Not showing the following contexts: `1`";

contextFreeDefinition[sym_Symbol, contexts_List] :=
(If[contexts =!= {}, Message[contextFreeDefinition::contexts, contexts]];

Internal`InheritedBlock[{sym}, ClearAttributes[sym, ReadProtected];
Block[{$ContextPath = Join[$ContextPath, contexts]},
Print@InputForm[FullDefinition[sym]]]])

contextFreeDefinition[sym_Symbol, context_String] :=
contextFreeDefinition[sym, {context}]

contextFreeDefinition[sym_Symbol] :=
contextFreeDefinition[sym, commonestContexts[sym]]




Understanding and using the function:


commonestContexts[sym, n] will find the n most frequently used contexts that are not in $ContextPath in the definition of symbol sym.


contextFreeDefinition[sym] will print the FullDefinition of sym, hiding the commonest context that would appear there. It will also issue a message with the name of the context being hidden.


contextFreeDefinition[sym, {"Context1`", "Context2`", ...}] will try to hide an explicitly given list of contexts.



Answer



Link to the code on GitHub




I have been using this. It's mostly Leonid's code from the stackoverflow question you linked to, but it uses Definition instead of DownValues. Symbol names are printed without any context, but the full symbol name is put into a Tooltip so you can always find out what context a symbol is in.


Update



FullDefinition[symbol] claims to "print the definitions given for symbol, and all symbols on which these depend", but sometimes one wants to explore deeper than the first level of dependency. Here is a version of Spelunk which uses plain Definition instead of FullDefinition, but allows you to click on symbols in the definition to get their definition. So you can dig right down into the dependency chain.


Update 2


The code now copes with definitions containing strings with backticks in, and cases where Definition throws an error.


Also, it now works for symbols which have OwnValues, e.g. Internal`$VideoEncodings.


BeginPackage["Spelunk`"];

Spelunk::usage = "Spelunk[symbol]";

Begin["`Private`"];


defboxes[symbol_Symbol] := Hold[symbol] /. _[sym_] :>
If[MemberQ[Attributes[sym], Locked], "Locked",
Internal`InheritedBlock[{sym},
Unprotect[sym]; ClearAttributes[sym, ReadProtected];
Quiet@Check[ToBoxes[Definition@sym], "DefError"] /.
InterpretationBox[a_, b___] :> a ]];

defboxes[s_String] := defboxes[#] &@ToExpression[s, InputForm, Unevaluated]

prettyboxes[boxes_] :=

boxes /. {" "} -> {"\n-----------\n"} //. {RowBox[{left___, ";",
next : Except["\n"], right___}] :>
RowBox[{left, ";", "\n", "\t", next, right}],
RowBox[{sc : ("Block" | "Module" | "With"), "[",
RowBox[{vars_, ",", body_}], "]"}] :>
RowBox[{sc, "[", RowBox[{vars, ",", "\n\t", body}], "]"}]};

fancydefinition[symbol_Symbol] :=
Cell[BoxData[
prettyboxes[

defboxes[symbol] /.
s_String?(StringMatchQ[#, __ ~~ "`" ~~ __] &) :>
First@StringCases[s,
a : (__ ~~ "`" ~~ b__) :> processsymbol[a, b]]]], "Output",
Background -> RGBColor[1, 0.95, 0.9],
CellGroupingRules->"OutputGrouping",
GeneratedCell->True,
CellAutoOverwrite->True,
ShowAutoStyles->True,
LanguageCategory->"Mathematica",

FontWeight->"Bold"
];

processsymbol[a_, b_] := Module[{db},
Which[
! StringFreeQ[a, "\""], a,
! StringFreeQ[a, "_"] || (db = defboxes[a]) === "Null",
TooltipBox[b, a],
db === "Locked", TooltipBox[b, a <> "\nLocked Symbol"],
db === "DefError", TooltipBox[b, a <> "\nError getting Definition"],

True, ButtonBox[TooltipBox[b, a], ButtonFunction :> Spelunk@a,
BaseStyle -> {}, Evaluator -> Automatic]]]

Spelunk[symbol_Symbol] := CellPrint[fancydefinition[symbol]];

Spelunk[s_String] := CellPrint[fancydefinition[#] &@ToExpression[s, InputForm, Unevaluated]];

SetAttributes[{defboxes, fancydefinition, Spelunk}, HoldFirst]

End[];


EndPackage[];

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...