Re: Patterns_ to define linear operators?
- To: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net
- Subject: [mg71441] Re: Patterns_ to define linear operators?
- From: Peter Pein <petsie at dordos.net>
- Date: Sat, 18 Nov 2006 04:41:11 -0500 (EST)
- Organization: 1&1 Internet AG
- References: <firstname.lastname@example.org>
W. Craig Carter schrieb:
> I'd like to implement a rule that will factor out constants from
> linear operators such as FourierTransform; i.e.,
> FourierTransform[a*f[x], x, k] to a*FourierTransform[f[x],x,k]
> Here is a method that seems sensible at first, but is potentially
> MyRule1 =
> FourierTransform[a_ f_[y_], x_, k_] :-> a FourierTransform[f[y],x,k]
> (which would fail if a was not free of x)
> An improvement is:
> MyRule2 =
> FourierTransform[a_?(FreeQ[#,x]&), f_[y_], x_, k_] :-> a FourierTransform[f[y],x,k]
> (which would fail if a were a product, say b x)
> Does anybody have advice on a robust way to implement this rule?
> Thanks, Craig Carter
I recommend essentially the same as Dimitris does, but use ReplaceRepeated
lintrans_[a_. * b_,x_,w_] :>
a*lintrans[b,x,w] /; FreeQ[a,x] && MemberQ[b,x,Infinity];
ft[3*x*g[y]*y*h[x],x,w] /. myrule
--> 3 ft[x y g[y] h[x],x,w]
ft[3*x*g[y]*y*h[x],x,w] //. myrule
--> 3 y ft[x h[x],x,w] g[y]
I guess, the second one is what you expect.
Prev by Date:
Re: mathematica & fortran ??
Next by Date:
Re: will someone explain the behavior of Unevaluated in this example?
Previous by thread:
RE: Patterns_ to define linear operators?
Next by thread: