Skip to main content

hold - Pure functions are not functions?


According to the manual:



"HoldAll is an attribute which specifies that all arguments to a function are to be maintained in an unevaluated form."



The following code yields, as expected, g[2,3] in Mathematica v9.01.



SetAttributes[f, HoldAll]; f[x_] := g @@ Unevaluated[x]; f[2 3]

When the function given the HoldAll attribute is defined as a pure function, the argument is evaluated despite the HoldAll attribute.


SetAttributes[h, HoldAll]; h = g @@ Unevaluated[#] &; h[2 3]

The above code returns 6 because the 2 3 multiplication is evaluated before being fed to h (use Trace to confirm the order).


1) Is the above behavior a bug or should it be considered a "documented feature"?


2) Is the above behavior consistent across Mathematica versions?



Answer



A response to this comment:




I understand that there are workarounds. I am wondering whether I am misinterpreting the manual.



Yes. The use of the word "function" in the manual may be confusing here. It is symbols that have attributes, not "functions". Attributes have an effect only at certain specific steps of the evaluation sequence, and only when the relevant symbol is the head of the expression that is being evaluated.


Here's the description of the evaluation sequence:


Given an expression h[e1, e2, ...],




  1. If the expression is a raw object (e.g., Integer, String, etc.), leave it unchanged.





  2. Evaluate the head h of the expression.




  3. Evaluate each element $e_i$ of the expression in turn. If h is a symbol with attributes HoldFirst, HoldRest, HoldAll, or HoldAllComplete, then skip evaluation of certain elements.




  4. (... several steps we don't care about now ...)





  5. Use any built-in transformation rules for h[e1, e2, ...] or for h[...][...].




What happens to your expression h[2*3] is this:


First, h gets evaluated to Function[g @@ Unevaluated[#]]. Now Function[...] would get evaluated further if it had any applicable transformation rules, but it doesn't. Next the system looks at transformation rules for Function[...][...] instead (notice the second set of brackets). There are rules for this, so the evaluation proceeds.


Notice that we never reached step 2. which would check any attributes of h! h already got replaced at step 1. Thus the attributes of h do not matter.




Another way to put it is that attributes do not belong to "functions". They belong to symbols, in your case to the symbol h.


Mathematica doesn't even have functions in the traditional sense. It has transformation rules.


The symbol h has an associated transformation rule which causes it to be replaced before any of its attributes could come into play.





Finally I'll just repeat J.M.'s comment. Use this:


h = Function[Null, g @@ Unevaluated[#], HoldAll]

I'll also note that Function is a very special symbol that has very special evaluation rules: the evaluator will hold y in an expression of the form f[x][y] only when f is Function (and in no other situation). In particular, it is not possible to bestow a custom symbol with this property.


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...