MathGroup Archive 2002

[Date Index] [Thread Index] [Author Index]

Search the Archive

Re: Reducing a function to one argument

  • To: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net
  • Subject: [mg36166] Re: [mg36155] Reducing a function to one argument
  • From: BobHanlon at aol.com
  • Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2002 04:15:43 -0400 (EDT)
  • Sender: owner-wri-mathgroup at wolfram.com

In a message dated 8/23/02 10:22:57 PM, nitlion at mindspring.com writes:

>I'm trying to figure out the correct syntax to do the following.  I have
>some function with three arguments, and I want to syntactically describe
>the
>single-argument function that holds two of those arguments constant (i.e.
>without creating that single-argument function).
>
>More specifically, I have defined
>
>    Machine[radix_,multiplier_,state_] := Module [{c,s},
>        c = Floor[state/base]; s = Mod[state,base];
>        multiplier*s + c
>        ]
>
>where I have a generalize 'machine', defined by the radix and multiplier,
>which converts one state into another state.  So I'd like to be able to
>do
>something like this:
>
>    NestList[Machine[10,7,#], 3, 22]
>
>to get the series of states that the radix-10 multiplier-7 machine runs
>through (starting with state 3).  However, this syntax doesn't seem to
>do
>what I want.
>
>I hope that description makes sense.  It seems like there must be a syntax
>to describe the function Machine[10,7,#].
>

I assume that you want "base" rather than "radix" in the definition (or vice 
versa).

Machine[base_, multiplier_, state_]:=
    Module[{c, s},
      c=Floor[state/base];
      s=Mod[state, base];
      multiplier*s+c];

NestList[Function[Machine[10,7,#]],3,22]

{3, 21, 9, 63, 27, 51, 12, 15, 36,
 
  45, 39, 66, 48, 60, 6, 42, 18,
 
  57, 54, 33, 24, 30, 3}

The abbreviation for  Function[body]  is  body&

%==NestList[Machine[10, 7, #]&, 3, 22]

True


Bob Hanlon
Chantilly, VA  USA


  • Prev by Date: RE: FindRoot on fn with vble num of vbles
  • Next by Date: Re: Re: MathLink for Excel (Windows 2000, Office 2000 and Mathematica 4.2
  • Previous by thread: Re: Reducing a function to one argument
  • Next by thread: a question about pattern replacements