MathGroup Archive 2010

[Date Index] [Thread Index] [Author Index]

Search the Archive

Re: user-defined functions in

  • To: mathgroup at
  • Subject: [mg112306] Re: user-defined functions in
  • From: John Fultz <jfultz at>
  • Date: Wed, 8 Sep 2010 01:00:32 -0400 (EDT)

It actually doesn't technically matter whether you use KernelExecute or 
FrontEndExecute in this case...I make the distinction as a matter of clarity, 
not technical necessity.  But MenuEvaluator->Automatic forces the contents of 
KernelExecute to be sent to the default kernel (you could also name a kernel on 
the rhs of MenuEvaluator), which is what AlexG was asking for.


John Fultz
jfultz at
User Interface Group
Wolfram Research, Inc.

On Tue, 7 Sep 2010 06:07:40 -0400 (EDT), magma wrote:
> John,
> it is not clear to me what is the practical difference between your
> suggested method and the one mentioned by AlexG.
> That is: what difference/advantage does it make to use KernelExecute
> instead of FrontEndExecute?
> And what is the purpose of MenuEvaluator->Automatic ?
> On Sep 7, 8:00 am, John Fultz <jfu... at> wrote:
>> On Sun, 5 Sep 2010 05:27:28 -0400 (EDT), AlexG wrote:
>>> Mathematica would be about 200% more useful if I could call my own
>>> functions from Does anybody know a way of
>>> accomplishing this? On this board, examples of item entries in the
>>> file take this form:
>>> Item[KeyEvent["...", Modifiers -> {...}], FrontEndExecute[...]
>>> Is there any way to communicate with the Kernel through
>>> FrontEndExecute[] here?
>>> Thanks, All
>> You can make this work by wrapping the thing you wish to evaluate in
>> KernelExecute, and by adding the option MenuEvaluator->Automatic to the
>> I=
> tem[]
>> listing.  E.g.,
>> Item[KeyEvent["F8"], KernelExecute[Print["F8 was pressed"=
> ]],
>> MenuEvaluator->Automatic]
>> Sincerely,
>> John Fultz
>> jfu... at
>> User Interface Group
>> Wolfram Research, Inc.

  • Prev by Date: Re: Finite Groups...infinite disappoinment
  • Next by Date: Re: notebooks default context
  • Previous by thread: Re: user-defined functions in
  • Next by thread: Problems with replacement rules inside functions