Re: Mathematica scoping / contexts / variable localization

*To*: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net*Subject*: [mg105065] Re: [mg105023] Mathematica scoping / contexts / variable localization*From*: "David Park" <djmpark at comcast.net>*Date*: Thu, 19 Nov 2009 05:26:00 -0500 (EST)*References*: <32142906.1258547432910.JavaMail.root@n11>

I'm not certain why many people seem to have problems with localization of symbols. I write lots of Mathematica definitions and code, I never use CleanSlate or Remove or Clear all Global` symbols and I never get into trouble (well, hardly ever). There are a few simple Mathematica style principles that can avoid most such problems. 1) Never assign values to simple symbols that you might conceivably want to use as symbolic variables, for example in equation solving. To save intermediate results while working out some development use names that you would never use as theoretical symbols; names such as: step1, step2, testmat, temporary. 2) Always use ClearAll[functionname] before a function definition because in development one might easily change the lhs argument pattern, leaving old definitions around. Also clear function names before solving differential equations because afterwards you may want to define them from the solution. 3) Always have an Initialization Section and load all packages needed in the notebook there, usually with Initialization cells. The following is an example of the type of writing we often see in postings to MathGroup. a = .5; b = 3; f = Exp[-a x] Sin[b x]; Plot[f, {x, 0, 6}] It works, but is an invitation to problems because one might later forget that these symbols have values, or where exactly they were set. So clean up the symbols and write a definition instead that localizes the arguments. Clear[a, b] ClearAll[f] f[a_, b_][x_] := Exp[-a x] Sin[b x] Plot[f[.5, 3][x], {x, 0, 6}] Or if one doesn't want to keep specifying the parameters in function calls because they aren't changed often, write: ClearAll[f] With[{a = .5, b = 3}, f[x_] := Exp[-a x] Sin[b x]] Plot[f[x], {x, 0, 6}] I apologize for a response that is more elementary than you were probably looking for but I hope it will be helpful to many new users. As for having a construction that automatically localized all symbols within it, I think one would soon find that exceptions were desired, in which case it is not much more convenient than the present case. Perhaps you meant to localize all symbols that have a Global context? But then suppose you are not working in the Global context? One could end up with some complicated rules as to what is localized. It seems better in localization structures to specify explicitly what is being localized. David Park djmpark at comcast.net http://home.comcast.net/~djmpark/ From: Leo Alekseyev [mailto:dnquark at gmail.com] Dear Mathematica gurus, One of the things that initially made Mathematica difficult for me to use was scoping -- in particular, the fact that all symbols by default appear in the global namespace. Even though this is a default behavior for interactive evaluation in many packages, e.g. R, in Mathematica, it leads to a greater potential for errors because unlike those languages, in Mathematica (1). a symbol can have multiple DownValues, and (2). if one forgets to explicitly localize a symbol inside a scoping construct, it may silently be taken from the global namespace. After many years I finally figured out a (more or less) clean way to structure my code and workflow, through a combination of defining modules, contexts, packages, and careful use of Clear and Remove. I still wonder, however, why there isn't a construct similar to Module that would define a unique private context for _all_ symbols within the construct (i.e. without having to declare them in a list). You can kind of simulate this behavior by using BeginContext["MyCont`"] together with redefining $ContextPath temporarily to only have "MyCont`" and "System`". This is obviously too verbose to be of practical use, but I do wonder why there isn't a built-in construct. I suppose my question is -- is there a deep wisdom behind its absence, or perhaps I am an anomaly in thinking that such behavior (automatic lexical scoping for symbols in subroutines, present in R and many others) would be incredibly handy?.. Thanks, --Leo

**Follow-Ups**:**Re: Re: Mathematica scoping / contexts / variable***From:*Virgil Stokes <vs@it.uu.se>

**Re: Permanent Computation Efficiency**

**Re: Define a function as a graphics directive?**

**Re: Mathematica scoping / contexts / variable localization**

**Re: Re: Mathematica scoping / contexts / variable**