[Date Index]
[Thread Index]
[Author Index]
Re: Naming pieces of patterns
*To*: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net
*Subject*: [mg29847] Re: [mg29816] Naming pieces of patterns
*From*: BobHanlon at aol.com
*Date*: Fri, 13 Jul 2001 04:19:27 -0400 (EDT)
*Sender*: owner-wri-mathgroup at wolfram.com
In a message dated 2001/7/12 3:03:40 AM, fischerc at itam.cas.cz writes:
>How can I as simply as possible use "substitutions"
>1.
>-(I/(2 a)) /. I/(2 a) -> A
>does not work, while
>(I/(2 a)) /. I/(2 a) -> A
>works well
>
>2.
>{(a + b), -(a + b)}/. a + b -> e
>gives
>{e, -a - b}
>instead of {e,-e}
>
>3.
>{-Sqrt[a + b], 1/Sqrt[a + b]} /. Sqrt[a + b] -> e
>gives
>{-e,1/Sqrt[a + b]}
>
>4.
>{I, 2 I, -I} /. I -> J
>gives
>{J, 2 \[ImaginaryI], -\[ImaginaryI]}
>
>I know _why_ these cases do not work, but I would like to know, if there
>is a possibilty to use a common pattern rule to substitute all
>occurences of an expression.
>
In general, use an atomic expression on the LHS of a rule
-(I/(2 a)) /. a -> I/(2A)
-A
{(a + b), -(a + b)} /. a -> e-b
{e, -e}
{-Sqrt[a + b], 1/Sqrt[a + b]} /. a -> e^2-b
{-Sqrt[e^2], 1/Sqrt[e^2]}
Simplify[%, e >= 0]
{-e, 1/e}
Use a rule that is general enough to encompass all of the cases of interest
{I, 2 I, -I} /. Complex[0, n_] -> n*J
{J, 2*J, -J}
{I, 2 I, -I} /. Complex[a_, n_] -> a+n*J
{J, 2*J, -J}
Bob Hanlon
Chantilly, VA USA
Prev by Date:
**Re: Changing Pure Function in Module**
Next by Date:
**Re: Changing Pure Function in Module**
Previous by thread:
**Re: Naming pieces of patterns**
Next by thread:
**Re: Naming pieces of patterns**
| |