Skip to main content

variable definitions - `Quit` vs `ClearAll["Global`*"]`


Quit erases all the definitions (by quitting the kernel), but so does ClearAll["Global`*"] (or other contexts). What's the difference in terms of variables in the notebook?



Answer



There are significant practical differences.


Quit does not "clear" anything, it instead restarts the kernel, i.e. resets it to the default state. There is a lot of internal state that changes during the session in ways that are different from creating new symbols or attaching definitions. So simply clearing (or removing) symbols won't reset the kernel. Examples include:




  • When you load a package, it does not only create its own context, it also causes $Context and $Packages to be modified





  • Symbolic results are cached (ClearSystemCache) and will actually cause symbolic processing functions to return different results than they would in a fresh session.




  • $ModuleNumber changes




  • Directory[] changes





  • pseudo-random number generator states change (and this also involves caching behind the scenes, which in principle affects memory usage)




  • Logins to various services (e.g. SocialMediaData) may be remembered until the end of the session




  • In/Out/$Line change





  • Parallel kernels keep running, ParallelNeeds keeps remembering "needed" packages, DistributeDefinitions keeps remembering what was distributed




  • A fresh kernel doesn't have all symbol definitions loaded. Using various symbols triggers loading definition and triggers loading packages.




  • etc.




These are just a few random but concrete examples that came to mind. This list is not at all meant to be exhaustive, it is simply to illustrate how many things get modified during a session. There are many more than these, very likely including many which concern the internal workings of Mathematica and we don't even know about (as they are not publicly documented).



This is all in addition to the difference between Remove and ClearAll which people mentioned in the comments and which is also significant (e.g. ClearAll won't help with shadowing but Remove will).


In short, if you are having trouble with Mathematica, reset if fully by restarting the kernel, don't just clear your own definitions.


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

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...
Post a Comment
Read more

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...
Post a Comment
Read more

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...
Post a Comment
Read more