Re: Questions about InputField

*To*: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net*Subject*: [mg80326] Re: Questions about InputField*From*: David Bailey <dave at Remove_Thisdbailey.co.uk>*Date*: Fri, 17 Aug 2007 01:57:57 -0400 (EDT)*References*: <fa1cen$7o7$1@smc.vnet.net>

Fred Simons wrote: > The following contains a highly simplified version of a problem I ran > into using Inputfields. > > Here is a construction for displaying the updated values of two numbers > n and m, and to enter values for m: > > Column[{Dynamic[n], InputField[Dynamic[m]]}] > > I want to use this column for controlling the following (infinite) loop: > > n = 100; m = 0; > While[n > 0, > n = n - m; m = 0] > > Having started this loop, the column shows the numbers 100 and 0. Now > enter 8 in the input field. Since the pre-emptive link will be used, the > evaluation of the loop will be interrupted and the assignment m=8 is > done. Then the loop is resumed, so n gets the value 92 and m is reset to 0. > > Having done this, the column indeed shows the value 92 for n, but for m > the value 8 is displayed. Aborting the loop and inspecting the value of > m gives 0, so here we have a Dynamic[m] that does NOT show the updated > value for m. > > It is very strange that we can force the updating of m by explicitly > entering the default value for the second argument of Dynamic: > > Column[{Dynamic[n], InputField[Dynamic[m, (m = #) &]]}] > > Restart the loop and repeatedly enter not too large positive values for > m. Then, on my Windows Visa system, sometimes the number will be > subtracted, sometimes not. > > Though this looks buggish, it probably is not. We have to take into > consideration that we do not know at which point the execution of the > loop is interrupted. That it does make a difference can be seen from > the following two examples. In the next two loops it is practically sure > that the interrupt will happen during the Pause statement. So the first > loop can be perfectly controlled and in the second loop nothing seems to > happen: > > n = 100; m = 0; > While[n > 0, > Pause[0.1]; n = n - m; m = 0] > n = 100; m = 0; > > While[n > 0, > n = n - m; Pause[0.1]; m = 0] > > So I suppose that in the situations that no subtraction happened, the > execution of the loop was interrupted just before the assignment m=0. > > Can someone explain why it is necessary to use the default value for the > second argument in Dynamic, and find a better and safer way of > controlling the loop, not using a Pause statement? > > Fred Simons > Eindhoven University of Technology > As you have already realised, there is a timing problem here, and it is vital to arrange code such as this so that timing is not an issue. Your example is perhaps a bit too cut down, but I assume that you want to loop for one value of n and to jump to n-m whenever the user enters a value of m. Therefore it makes sense to do the subtraction inside the Dynamic function: Column[{Dynamic[n], InputField[Dynamic[m, (n = n - #; m = #) &],Number]}] Now the loop is much simpler - in fact it contains no body at all, so let's put a line of code to display n in the notebook status field: n = 100; While[n > 0, SetOptions[SelectedNotebook[], WindowStatusArea -> ToString[n]] ]; SetOptions[SelectedNotebook[], WindowStatusArea -> ""] Note that I have reset the status field after the loop is over to avoid confusion. I have also added Number as a second argument to InputField - this makes the code more robust because you can't enter a non-numeric value. Of course, it might be simpler to make your InputField work on n directly. David Bailey http://www.dbaileyconsultancy.co.uk

**RE: Manipulating current read position in a binary file**

**Re: Re: Complexity explosion in linear solve**

**Questions about InputField**

**Mathematica 6**