Skip to main content

Function that counts the number of arguments of other functions


I have a newbie question: is it possible to write a function that counts the arguments (total and optionals) of a given function? Possibly it should be able to work with built-in and custom functions as well.


For example, if I define


f1[x_Integer] := x + 1;

f2[x_Integer, y_Integer: 1] := x + y;
g[x_Real, y_] := x - y;

I would like to have


countArgs[f1]
{1,0}
countArgs[f2]
{2,1}
countArgs[g]
{2,0}


and also, for example,


countArgs[Sin]
{1,0}

thank you.


@celtschk


Well, I didn't even know the use of UpValues, but basically what I am asking is the number of inputs the function needs, I don't care what the function does with those inputs. In your examples I would say



  • {Infinity,0} for foo? It's more a question than an answer, sorry, but I had not thought aboute these unusual cases.


  • this is nasty, I didn't think of a case like that either, I would say {3,{2}}, the {2} meaning exactly 2, to avoid bar[1,2], which is not legal.

  • {2,0} but just because you wrote f[g,g], so it's practically a guess, I don't know what are UpValues and if they go against the spirit of my question by messing with the function. I hope I was clear.

  • the last one I would say {3,0} as they were flattened.


Thank you, I start seeing that my question is not so obvious because there are too many complicated definitions for functions to take into account.


For now I understood that is possible with built-in functions with


SyntaxInformation[f]

(thank you Heike) but that mybe is a little too much asking for a general custom function.



Answer




Here is my attempt. The function below will work on functions with default args and options, as well as those having multiple definitions. I made the following assumptions:



  • Only DownValues - based definitions are considered

  • Default arguments, if present, are always to the right of mandatory arguments.

  • Options, if present, are always to the right of all other arguments, and are declared either by OptionsPattern[] or opts:OptionsPattern[] pattern.


Here is the code:


ClearAll[countArgs];
SetAttributes[countArgs, {HoldAll, Listable}];
countArgs[f_Symbol] :=

With[{dv = DownValues[f]}, countArgs[dv]];

countArgs[Verbatim[HoldPattern][HoldPattern[f_Symbol[args___]]] :> _] :=
countArgs[f[args]];

countArgs[
f_[Except[_Optional | _OptionsPattern |
Verbatim[Pattern][_, _OptionsPattern]], rest___]] :=
{1, 0, 0} + countArgs[f[rest]];


countArgs[ f_[o__Optional, rest___]] :=
{0, Length[HoldComplete[o]], 0} + countArgs[f[rest]];

countArgs[f_[_OptionsPattern | Verbatim[Pattern][_, _OptionsPattern]]] :=
{0, 0, 1};

countArgs[f_[]] := {0, 0, 0};

This function represents a mini-parser for the function's declarations. It returns a list of 3-element sublists, of the length equal to a number of DownValues. In each sublist, the first number is a number of normal arguments, the second one is a number of default arguments, and the last one (which can only be 0 or 1), tells us whether or not there are options declared.


Some examples:



ClearAll[f1, f2, f3, f4, g]
f1[x_Integer] := x + 1;
f2[x_Integer, y_Integer: 1] := x + y;
f3[x_, y_, z_: 1, q_: 2, opts : OptionsPattern[]] := x + y + z + q;
f4[x_, y_: 1] := x + y;
f4[x_, y_, z_] := x + y + z;
g[x_Real, y_] := x - y;

Now applying our function:


countArgs /@ {f1, f2, f3, f4, g}



{{{1, 0, 0}}, {{1, 1, 0}}, {{2, 2, 1}}, {{1, 1, 0}, {3, 0, 0}},{{2, 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...