MathGroup Archive 2006

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

Search the Archive

Re: Re: Programming style: postfix/prefix vs. functional


@ is an abbreviation for Composition:

   Composition[f, g][expr]
f[g[expr]]

   f@g[expr]
f[g[expr]]

But this one is a bit difficult to discover from the documentation.  If 
you know the term "Composition", then of course you can do the reverse 
look-up in the Help Browser.

Unfortunately, if you try the Help Browser directly for "@", even using 
the Master Index tab, you won't find it!

Moreover, if you try the default Built-in Functions tab you search for 
@, you'll be taken to the entry for Apply (@@).

So this is definitely a gap in the documentation indexing.


Chris Chiasson wrote:
> One thing I have wondered is, what function corresponds to the short
> hand "@". I know @ appears in Operate. Also, the ? can sometimes tell
> what function an operator represents (try ?/@ ) , but ?@ only gives
> System`$ (the symbol $ in the context System).
> 
> 
> On 10/20/06, Will Robertson <wspr81 at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> As a newcomer to Mathematica, I'm a little unsure on what "good style"
>> would be in this programming language. I notice that several functions
>> have prefix and postfix notations such as //. for ReplaceRepeated, /@
>> for Map, and so on.
>>
>> Clearly using these forms makes the code more compact, but sacrifices
>> some level of readability. Are there guidelines or suggestions that
>> have built up over the years of whether these are "good" or "bad" to
>> use?
>>
>> If it's simply personal preference, what do you like to use?
>> --
>> Many thanks,
>> Will Robertson
>>
>>
> 
> 

-- 
Murray Eisenberg                     murray at math.umass.edu
Mathematics & Statistics Dept.
Lederle Graduate Research Tower      phone 413 549-1020 (H)
University of Massachusetts                413 545-2859 (W)
710 North Pleasant Street            fax   413 545-1801
Amherst, MA 01003-9305


  • Prev by Date: Re: Strange newbie problem
  • Next by Date: Re: Plot3D question
  • Previous by thread: Re: Programming style: postfix/prefix vs. functional
  • Next by thread: Re: Re: Programming style: postfix/prefix vs. functional