Mathematica 9 is now available
Services & Resources / Wolfram Forums
-----
 /
MathGroup Archive
2005
*January
*February
*March
*April
*May
*June
*July
*August
*September
*October
*November
*December
*Archive Index
*Ask about this page
*Print this page
*Give us feedback
*Sign up for the Wolfram Insider

MathGroup Archive 2005

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

Search the Archive

Re: Problems with my first package:Statistics`Common`RegressionCommon`BestFitParameters instead ofBestFitParameters

  • To: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net
  • Subject: [mg58115] Re: Problems with my first package:Statistics`Common`RegressionCommon`BestFitParameters instead ofBestFitParameters
  • From: David Bailey <dave at Remove_Thisdbailey.co.uk>
  • Date: Sun, 19 Jun 2005 03:43:18 -0400 (EDT)
  • References: <d90soh$8uq$1@smc.vnet.net>
  • Sender: owner-wri-mathgroup at wolfram.com

David Annetts wrote:
> Hi Frank 
> 
> <snippage>
> 
>>ExportedFunction[whatever_,options___]:=Block[{...},
>>...
>>RegressResult=NonlinearRegress[...]
>>...
>>Return[Switch[verbosity /. {options},
>>      0, BestFitParameters /. RegressResult,
>>      1, {NMinResultReport, RegressResult}
>>      ]];
>>]
>>
>>With verbosity->0, everything is fine now, but with 1 I get:
>>...
>>Statistics`Common`RegressionCommon`BestFitParameters -> {a -> 
>>0.500455, 
>>    b -> 0.999833},
>>...
>>
>>where I expected simply
>>
>>BestFitParameters -> {a -> 0.500455, b -> 0.999833},
>>
>>Can you tell me, without me creating a minimal example, what 
>>I can do to simplify the Return value?
> 
> 
> It's difficult to tell what the problem might be with a code excerpt, but
> you might try
> 
> 	Return[Switch[verbosity /. {options},
> 		0, BestFitParameters /. RegressResult,
> 		1, NMinResultReport]
> 		];
> 
> This depends on something like 
> 	NMinResultReport = {various options} /. RegressResult;
> in your function.
> 
> I'd also recommend using True and False rather than 0 and 1 for your
> options.  Yes, we can write Fortran in Mathematica, but why bother, since
> True is so much easier to read, and more keeping with other Mathematica
> functions.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Dave.
> 
Even Fortran has a LOGICAL data type!

David Bailey
http://www.dbaileyconsultancy.co.uk


  • Prev by Date: Re: Re: Epilog -vs- Prolog -vs- DisplayTogether
  • Next by Date: Re: Nested Commutators
  • Previous by thread: Re: Problems with my first package:Statistics`Common`RegressionCommon`BestFitParameters instead ofBestFitParameters
  • Next by thread: Problems With NonlinearRegress