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. > >