Skip to main content

front end - Difference between ParentList and Inherited


In this answer Carl Woll uses the ParentList symbol to inherit old input aliases when adding a new one:


CurrentValue[EvaluationNotebook[], 

   InputAliases] = {"0x" -> 
    RowBox[{InterpretationBox[
       StyleBox["\"0\"", ShowStringCharacters -> False], 
       Function[Null, 
        FromDigits[StringDrop[ToString@Unevaluated@#, 1], 16], 
        HoldAll]], "\[InvisibleApplication]", "\[InvisibleSpace]", 
      StyleBox["x", ShowAutoStyles -> False]}], ParentList};
CurrentValue[EvaluationNotebook[], InputAliases] /. Rule[a_, _] :> a

{"0x", ParentList}


And we can still use the all the basic built-in aliases


On the other-hand, we can get the same result using Inherited:


CurrentValue[EvaluationNotebook[], InputAliases] = Inherited;
CurrentValue[EvaluationNotebook[], 
   InputAliases] = {"0x" -> 
    RowBox[{InterpretationBox[
       StyleBox["\"0\"", ShowStringCharacters -> False], 
       Function[Null, 
        FromDigits[StringDrop[ToString@Unevaluated@#, 1], 16], 

        HoldAll]], "\[InvisibleApplication]", "\[InvisibleSpace]", 
      StyleBox["x", ShowAutoStyles -> False]}], Inherited};
CurrentValue[EvaluationNotebook[], InputAliases] /. Rule[a_, _] :> a

{"0x", Inherited}

And we can, again, use the all of the built-in aliases, but if we look at the AbsoluteCurrentValues for the first case:


CurrentValue[EvaluationNotebook[], 
   InputAliases] = {"0x" -> 
    RowBox[{InterpretationBox[

       StyleBox["\"0\"", ShowStringCharacters -> False], 
       Function[Null, 
        FromDigits[StringDrop[ToString@Unevaluated@#, 1], 16], 
        HoldAll]], "\[InvisibleApplication]", "\[InvisibleSpace]", 
      StyleBox["x", ShowAutoStyles -> False]}], ParentList};
AbsoluteCurrentValue[EvaluationNotebook[], InputAliases] /. 
 Rule[a_, _] :> a

{"0x", "intt", "dintt", "sumt", "prodt", "dt", "ia", "cbrt", "surd", \
"ket", "bra", "braket", "delay", "grad", "del.", "delx", "del2", \

"notation", "notation>", "notation<", "symb", "infixnotation", \
"addia", "pattwraper", "madeboxeswraper"}

And the second:


CurrentValue[EvaluationNotebook[], InputAliases] = Inherited;
CurrentValue[EvaluationNotebook[], 
   InputAliases] = {"0x" -> 
    RowBox[{InterpretationBox[
       StyleBox["\"0\"", ShowStringCharacters -> False], 
       Function[Null, 

        FromDigits[StringDrop[ToString@Unevaluated@#, 1], 16], 
        HoldAll]], "\[InvisibleApplication]", "\[InvisibleSpace]", 
      StyleBox["x", ShowAutoStyles -> False]}], Inherited};
AbsoluteCurrentValue[EvaluationNotebook[], InputAliases] /. 
 Rule[a_, _] :> a

{"0x", Inherited}

We see that even though they are operationally similar, the AbsoluteCurrentValue result is different.


So I guess my question is, how do ParentList and Inherited differ outside of this small difference?



ParentList is obviously more scoped to list-type constructs, but why does it need to exist at all?



Extra Info:


Per Albert Retey's comment I checked whether either responded differently to upstream changes:


StyleSheetEdit["MyStyle1" -> "Input",
  {
   InputAliases -> {"0x" -> "\"\[SadSmiley]\"", ParentList}
   },
  "MakeCell" -> True
  ];

CellPrint[Cell[BoxData[""], "MyStyle1"]];
StyleSheetEdit["MyStyle2" -> "Input",
  {
   InputAliases -> {"0x" -> "\"\[SadSmiley]\"", Inherited}
   },
  "MakeCell" -> True
  ];
CellPrint[Cell[BoxData[""], "MyStyle2"]];
CurrentValue[EvaluationNotebook[], InputAliases] = {"a" -> "\"b\""};


Both cells behaved entirely the same



Answer



Its name is misleading, unfortunately, because it can be very useful.


A better name would be something around ParentSequence/ParentArguments. Here is one example:


CurrentValue[EvaluationNotebook[], TaggingRules] = {"old" -> "value"};
cell = EvaluationCell[];

CurrentValue[cell, TaggingRules] = {ParentList, "new" -> "value"};
AbsoluteCurrentValue[cell, TaggingRules]



{"old" -> "value", "new" -> "value"}

CurrentValue[cell, TaggingRules] = {Inherited, "new" -> "value"};
AbsoluteCurrentValue[cell, TaggingRules]


{{"old" -> "value"}, "new" -> "value"}

So in this case you really want to use it.



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

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}]
Post a Comment
Read more