Skip to main content

replacement - Pattern does not match with Orderless head



Why does the following pattern matching not succeed?


ClearAll[f];
SetAttributes[f,Orderless];
HoldForm[f[a,d[],b,c]]/.HoldPattern[f[a,d[],b,z_]]:>{z}
(* f[a,d[],b,c] *)

I expected that because f is Orderless, the pattern matcher should try all possible orders of arguments and find a match.


If the expression is not held, I find:


ClearAll[f];
SetAttributes[f,Orderless];

f[a,d[],b,c]/.HoldPattern[f[a,d[],b,z_]]:>{z}
(* {c} *)

I.e. the desired result. I know that because f is Orderless and the expression is evaluated, the arguments are sorted into canonical order a, b, c, d[]. It would appear in this case that the pattern matcher really does try all possible orders of arguments to find a match.


Why doesn't it work in the first example?


EDIT:


Here are some further examples:


ClearAll[f];
SetAttributes[f, Orderless];


Hold[f[a, b, c, d[]]] /. HoldPattern[f[a, b, c, z_]] :> {"Matched", {z}}
(* Hold[{"Matched", {d[]}}] *)

Hold[f[a, b, c[], d]] /. HoldPattern[f[a, b, c[], z_]] :> {"Matched", {z}}
(* Hold[{"Matched", {d}}] *)

Hold[f[a, b[], c, d]] /. HoldPattern[f[a, b[], c, z_]] :> {"Matched", {z}}
(* Hold[f[a, b[], c, d]] *)

Hold[f[a[], b, c, d]] /. HoldPattern[f[a[], b, c, z_]] :> {"Matched", {z}}

(* Hold[f[a[], b, c, d]] *)

This seems very inconsistent to me; how can I understand what is happening here?


EDIT:


An illuminating example:


Hold[f[a, c, b[], d]] /. HoldPattern[f[a, b[], c, z_]] :> {"Matched", {z}}
(* Hold[{"Matched", {d}}] *)

The Trace shows no argument reordering, but it appears that the pattern matcher must actually be reordering the pattern to (the canonical order) f[a, c, b[], z_] because f is Orderless, even though HoldPattern should prevent "regular" evaluation.


What remains confusing is what exactly is meant by "In matching patterns with Orderless functions, all possible orders of arguments are tried." in the documentation. On face value, the four examples shown above contradict this.




Answer



I am betting that this is almost certainly an optimization short-cut. If Orderless had to try every ordering it would be extremely slow when there are a moderate number of arguments, but it is not.


Consider for example:


f @@@ Hold @@ {RandomSample[Range@12]}
Hold @@ {f @@ Range@12 /. {7 -> _}}
MatchQ[%%, %]


Hold[f[2, 6, 11, 7, 12, 10, 4, 1, 3, 5, 8, 9]]


Hold[f[1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, _]]

False

This test is surely not performing 479,001,600 comparisons, one for each permutation. Instead I suppose that pattern matching assumes that arguments of Orderless heads will first be placed in order and applies logic accordingly.


Since the first two of your "further examples" match I also suppose that this is because the sorted order of arguments on the RHS matches the verbatim order on the left; perhaps this case is tried first.


Comments

Post a Comment

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[ ...
Post a Comment
Read more

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...
Post a Comment
Read more

Is there a way to do conditional matrix loop using 'continue'

I have the following: n = 3; m = 5; ww = RandomReal[{0, 0.1}, {n, n}]; uu = RandomReal[{0, 1}, {m, n}]; pp = RandomReal[{0, 1}, {n, n}]; ss = RandomInteger[{0, 5}, {m, n}]; Grid[{{"ww", "uu", "pp", "ss"}, {ww // TableForm, uu // TableForm, pp // TableForm, ss // TableForm}}, Spacings -> {5, 2}, Dividers -> All] where I would like to look at every element of matrix ss and produce a matrix tt , with zeroes at the locations in ss which have zeroes, and in all other positions do the following: tt = (-1/Subscript[ww, m]) Log[(1 - uu)/(Subscript[pp, m - 1])], where Subscript[ww, m] is the value at index of ww matrix and where Subscript[pp, m - 1] is the value at index-1 of pp matrix. So for example if the first value ever read from matrix ss happens to be 2, then value taken from matrix ww would be from the row 2, but from pp would be from row 1. Also how to tell difference between a 0 as a valid value from within the matrix elemen...
Post a Comment
Read more