Skip to main content

dynamic - DynamicModule, SaveDefinitions and global functions




Unfortunately, I had not checked stackoverflow, because there, the exact same behavior was already reported. Please see the Q&A "SaveDefinitions considered dangerous".




Up-front, I'm on Ubuntu 12.04 with Mathematica 9.0.1 and let's start with the questions:




  • Should functions which are used in a Manipulate be local to this dynamic cell, when I save them withSaveDefinitions`?

  • Is it OK, that after a kernel-restart Manipulate defines global functions?


I noticed this behavior a while ago when something did not work as I expected it. Here is a small toy example. First we define a function, which (we assume we don't know this now) is not correct and will be fixed later:


f[x_?NumericQ] := "Wrong Implementation";

Now we make a small dynamic environment where we use this function and we save the definitions used there.


Manipulate[f[x] + x, {x, 0, 1}, SaveDefinitions -> True]

Sliding a bit around gives the correct output:



Mathematica graphics


Now, we notice our error in f, because (let's say) f is going to work even when we don't have numeric values. Therefore, we fix the pattern and evaluate


ClearAll[f]
f[x_] := "Correct Implementation!"

this redefinition is instantly shown in the Manipulate, which is kind of weird, because we explicitly told Mathematica to save the definition and let me cite the documentation: SaveDefinition...



is an option to Manipulate and related functions that specifies whether current definitions relevant for the evaluation of the expression being manipulated should automatically be saved.



Mathematica graphics



There is even more, because when you now Quit[] the kernel and then do nothing else that move the slider, you see that now the first definition is used again and the output changes to "Wrong Implementation". This seems fine, because Manipulate finally remembers what is should have saved.


However, this is not what broke my neck. What really took time to debug was that the wrong definition of f is leaked into the global context:


f[3]

(* "Wrong Implementation" *)

The problem back then, when I had this issue, was that although I evaluated the correct definition,


f[x_] := "Correct Implementation!"

the other one was used, because its pattern was more specific.



f[3]

(* "Wrong Implementation" *)

Any comments?




Comments

Popular posts from this blog

plotting - Plot 4D data with color as 4th dimension

I have a list of 4D data (x position, y position, amplitude, wavelength). I want to plot x, y, and amplitude on a 3D plot and have the color of the points correspond to the wavelength. I have seen many examples using functions to define color but my wavelength cannot be expressed by an analytic function. Is there a simple way to do this? Answer Here a another possible way to visualize 4D data: data = Flatten[Table[{x, y, x^2 + y^2, Sin[x - y]}, {x, -Pi, Pi,Pi/10}, {y,-Pi,Pi, Pi/10}], 1]; You can use the function Point along with VertexColors . Now the points are places using the first three elements and the color is determined by the fourth. In this case I used Hue, but you can use whatever you prefer. Graphics3D[ Point[data[[All, 1 ;; 3]], VertexColors -> Hue /@ data[[All, 4]]], Axes -> True, BoxRatios -> {1, 1, 1/GoldenRatio}]

plotting - Filling between two spheres in SphericalPlot3D

Manipulate[ SphericalPlot3D[{1, 2 - n}, {θ, 0, Pi}, {ϕ, 0, 1.5 Pi}, Mesh -> None, PlotPoints -> 15, PlotRange -> {-2.2, 2.2}], {n, 0, 1}] I cant' seem to be able to make a filling between two spheres. I've already tried the obvious Filling -> {1 -> {2}} but Mathematica doesn't seem to like that option. Is there any easy way around this or ... Answer There is no built-in filling in SphericalPlot3D . One option is to use ParametricPlot3D to draw the surfaces between the two shells: Manipulate[ Show[SphericalPlot3D[{1, 2 - n}, {θ, 0, Pi}, {ϕ, 0, 1.5 Pi}, PlotPoints -> 15, PlotRange -> {-2.2, 2.2}], ParametricPlot3D[{ r {Sin[t] Cos[1.5 Pi], Sin[t] Sin[1.5 Pi], Cos[t]}, r {Sin[t] Cos[0 Pi], Sin[t] Sin[0 Pi], Cos[t]}}, {r, 1, 2 - n}, {t, 0, Pi}, PlotStyle -> Yellow, Mesh -> {2, 15}]], {n, 0, 1}]

plotting - Mathematica: 3D plot based on combined 2D graphs

I have several sigmoidal fits to 3 different datasets, with mean fit predictions plus the 95% confidence limits (not symmetrical around the mean) and the actual data. I would now like to show these different 2D plots projected in 3D as in but then using proper perspective. In the link here they give some solutions to combine the plots using isometric perspective, but I would like to use proper 3 point perspective. Any thoughts? Also any way to show the mean points per time point for each series plus or minus the standard error on the mean would be cool too, either using points+vertical bars, or using spheres plus tubes. Below are some test data and the fit function I am using. Note that I am working on a logit(proportion) scale and that the final vertical scale is Log10(percentage). (* some test data *) data = Table[Null, {i, 4}]; data[[1]] = {{1, -5.8}, {2, -5.4}, {3, -0.8}, {4, -0.2}, {5, 4.6}, {1, -6.4}, {2, -5.6}, {3, -0.7}, {4, 0.04}, {5, 1.0}, {1, -6.8}, {2, -4.7}, {3, -1....