Re: Re: Mathematica language issues
- To: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net
- Subject: [mg53016] Re: [mg52997] Re: Mathematica language issues
- From: DrBob <drbob at bigfoot.com>
- Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 06:34:31 -0500 (EST)
- References: <200412171020.FAA16185@smc.vnet.net> <cq0tm1$2m2$1@smc.vnet.net> <200412191114.GAA17994@smc.vnet.net>
- Reply-to: drbob at bigfoot.com
- Sender: owner-wri-mathgroup at wolfram.com
>> First Unevaluated is stipped away and Mathematica attempts ot evaluate
>> 2*(1+1). Since it knows no rule to apply
What about the rule 1+1 == 2? Mathematica doesn't know THAT rule?
Andrzej's explanation does a lot of things, but what it doesn't do is to EXPLAIN anything.
Bobby
On Sun, 19 Dec 2004 06:14:42 -0500 (EST), David Bailey <dave at Remove_Thisdbailey.co.uk> wrote:
> Andrzej Kozlowski wrote:
>> On 17 Dec 2004, at 19:20, Maxim wrote:
>>
>>
>>> In[5]:=
>>> Unevaluated[1 + 1]*2
>>> 2*Unevaluated[1 + 1]
>>>
>>> Out[5]=
>>> 4
>>>
>>> Out[6]=
>>> 2*Unevaluated[1 + 1]
>>>
>>
>>
>> This is not a glitch but works exactly as one woudl expect. You can
>> see the difference and the reason by looking at Trace in both cases
>> (although there is no need for that, if you understand Unevaluated you
>> can see it right away).
>>
>> First:
>> 2*Unevaluated[1+1]//Trace
>>
>>
>> {2 (1+1),2 Unevaluated[1+1]}
>>
>>
>> First Unevaluated is stipped away and Mathematica attempts ot evaluate
>> 2*(1+1). Since it knows no rule to apply and the expression has not
>> changed Unevaluated is restored and evaluation is completed with the
>> output you see.
>>
>>
>>
>> Unevaluated[1+1]*2//Trace
>>
>> {(1+1) 2,2 (1+1),{1+1,2},2 2,4}
>>
>> As before, first Unevaluated is stripped away and Mathematica tires to
>> evaluate 2*(1+1). It now knows a rule to apply, which is given by the
>> Orderless attribute and the canonical ordering, so it converts the
>> expression into the form 2 (1+1). But now Unevaluated is not restored
>> because the expression has changed so evaluation continues with 1+1
>> evaluationg to 2 and finally you obtain 4.
>>
>> Now, I have honstly considered this case only because I could see at
>> once what what was going on. I do not knwo if any of the others are
>> glitches but jusdging by my experience with the past "language
>> glitches" you have reported (unlike the more serious problems desribed
>> in your last posting) I rather doubt it. However I have no time to
>> spend on this just to prove a point (again).
>>
>>
>>
>> Andrzej Kozlowski
>> Chiba, Japan
>> http://www.akikoz.net/~andrzej/
>> http://www.mimuw.edu.pl/~akoz/
>>
> To be fair to Maxim,
>
> You have to read between the lines of the documentation a little to
> appreciate that Unevaluated should work this way - perhaps this could be
> considered a 'documentation glitch'!
>
> David Bailey
> dbaileyconsultancy.co.uk
>
>
>
>
--
DrBob at bigfoot.com
www.eclecticdreams.net
- References:
- Mathematica language issues
- From: ab_def@prontomail.com (Maxim)
- Re: Mathematica language issues
- From: David Bailey <dave@Remove_Thisdbailey.co.uk>
- Mathematica language issues