Re: Should Pure Functions Require &

*To*: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net*Subject*: [mg29744] Re: Should Pure Functions Require &*From*: "Orestis Vantzos" <atelesforos at hotmail.com>*Date*: Fri, 6 Jul 2001 03:24:38 -0400 (EDT)*Organization*: National Technical University of Athens, Greece*References*: <9i06ah$h0l$1@smc.vnet.net>*Sender*: owner-wri-mathgroup at wolfram.com

Would Select[data, #!=0] be interpreted as Select[data, #!=0&] or as Select[data, #!=0]& ? Why the first and not the second(or vice versa)? Orestis Ersek, Ted R" <ErsekTR at navair.navy.mil> wrote in message news:9i06ah$h0l$1 at smc.vnet.net... > I stated wondering if all would work well if pure functions didn't require & > at the end. I am thinking it would be great if a future version of > Mathematica would make the use of & optional. > > So for example we could use > Select[data, #!=0] > instead of > Select[data, #!=0&] > > > and we could use > #^2 /@expr > instead of > #^2& /@expr > > I would want to have pure functions ending with & optional rather than > prohibited for backward compatibility. Wouldn't life be better if we didn't > have to use &. Is there a reason why my suggestion would not work? > > Regards, > Ted Ersek > Download Mathematica tips, tricks from > http://www.verbeia.com/mathematica/tips/Tricks.html > >