[Date Index] [Thread Index] [Author Index]
Re: Re: What is @@@?
On Mon, 7 Apr 2008 05:14:47 -0400 (EDT), Szabolcs Horv=E1t wrote: > Szabolcs Horv=E1t wrote: > >> AES wrote: >>> In article <ft2au1$ph5$1 at smc.vnet.net>, >>> "Kevin J. McCann" <Kevin.McCann at umbc.edu> wrote: >>> >>>> I have seen several references to the command @@@ in this newsgroup, >>>> but a query of the online Documentation Center just refers me to >>>> Apply (@@). What does it do and where can I read about it? >>>> >>> More broadly: >>> >>> * Do all the _non-alphabetical_ commands (or symbols, or operators, >>> or abbreviations, or whatever is their proper appellation) like >>> "/.", "//.", "->", "=>", "@", etc, etc, etc, have a unique >>> appellation _as a class_? >>> >>> * Does each of these non-alphabetical constructs also have a unique >>> individual name? >>> >>> * Suppose one wanted to get a complete (complete!) list of all of >>> these non-alphabetical constructs, their names, and maybe a brief >>> description of their meaning, to use maybe as a reference list, a crib >>> sheet, or just to see which of them one hasn't learned yet. Where >>> would one go? >>> >> >> I remembered that there was a table in the documentation listing all >> operators in order of decreasing *precedence*. It is very easy to find >> by searching for "precedence" in the hand compiled master index of the >> v5 documentation. But after having searched for 10 minutes, I just >> don't have any more patience to look it up in the v6 documentation ... >> >> So here's the v5 doc link: >> >> http://documents.wolfram.com/mathematica/book/section-A.2.7 >> > > Well, it's no wonder I didn't find it. It is under > Core Language -> Appendix: Language Structure -> Input Syntax -> > Operator Input Forms in the "Virtual Book", but it turns out that the > files are missing! Clicking on the Input Syntax link takes you to the right document, at which point you have to scroll down about a third of the way through (i.e., if the links were functioning correctly, they would have opened the Input Syntax document and scrolled it to the right location). I've reported the broken links in our bugs database. Thank you for mentioning the problem. For what it's worth, I've had the same problem locating this document using the search system myself (I also find it exceedingly useful). I think the document responds so poorly to searches because of its length and diversity. I have on my computer a development version where the document has been split up, and searching for "precedence" points right to this table (no need for scrolling, even) as the second hit. I can't offer ironclad guarantees on precisely what the behavior will be in the next version, but I think it's moving in the right direction. In the mean time, the best key term to search on would be "Input syntax". Sincerely, John Fultz jfultz at wolfram.com User Interface Group Wolfram Research, Inc.