Re: Re: Getting rid of those deprecated Do[] loops?
- To: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net
- Subject: [mg92846] Re: [mg92826] Re: Getting rid of those deprecated Do[] loops?
- From: peter <pl.0 at me.com>
- Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2008 05:36:14 -0400 (EDT)
- References: <gcsctj$8mj$1@smc.vnet.net> <gcv77o$dse$1@smc.vnet.net>
gimme a Do-loop any day guys; I guess I'm too old to change.
Peter
2008/10/14 AES <siegman at stanford.edu>
> In article <gcv77o$dse$1 at smc.vnet.net>,
> "sjoerd.c.devries at gmail.com" <sjoerd.c.devries at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Multidimensional iteration is the sixth of the possible formats
> > described in the documentation of the Table and Do functions. The
> > construction that surprised you is the fifth one. Actually, you are
> > able to iterate over an arbitrary list of objects.
> >
> > Cheers -- Sjoerd
>
> It's not obvious to me from either of those that the iterator "i" itself
> can be a multi-dimensional variable -- though it seems to be the case.
>
> For example, could I write an iterator of the form
>
> { {i,j} , { {i1,j1}, {i2,j2}, . . .}}
>
> or something similar, and then use i and j in the Table entries, instead
> writing this in the form
>
> { k , { {i1,j1}, {i2,j2}, . . .}}
>
> and then using k[[1], k[[2]] in the Table entires?
>
> And the sixth format does not produce the output that I wanted without
> using Flatten -- which is an OK function, except you have to learn and
> understand it well enough to know whether you do or do not need the "1"
> in the second argument to get what you want.
>
>