MathGroup Archive 1997

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

Search the Archive

More questions on expanding function names to explicit forms

  • To: mathgroup at
  • Subject: [mg8169] More questions on expanding function names to explicit forms
  • From: Paulo Mouat <mouat at>
  • Date: Sat, 16 Aug 1997 11:51:13 -0400
  • Sender: owner-wri-mathgroup at

Thank you very much for your reply, but I was wondering if there was
a way of automatically obtaining the explicit mathematical form of
functions, that is, one that does not require preparation to do so, as
in the HoldForm suggestions you made.

Suppose I want to write a report that uses many of the advanced
mathematical functions supported by Mathematica.  It makes sense to
obtain an explicit mathematical form even if only to indicate that from 
then on Erf[x] would be a shorthand to 2/Sqrt[Pi] Integrate ...

Also, I was interested in such representations so as to obtain explicit
mathematical forms in intermediate or final results, avoiding the use
of function names.  Since simple mathematics can lead to more 
complicated mathematics upon certain calculations, I would like to avoid 
the introduction of advanced function names so that the output is
readable by someone not familiar with the particular Mathematica
representation of advanced functions.

Is there a simple way to do this--meaning not having to type every
HoldForm form for every function?

If not, is there a package with such forms (Mathematica has to resort to 
explicit forms of functions in order to do symbolic operations, has it 
not?) or a way to generate it in a (perhaps quasi-) automatic fashion?

All the best.

> You can do this in the same way that you can convert an output such
> as the integer 4 into its explicit mathematical form 2+2:
> In[5]:= 4 /. 4 -> HoldForm[2+2]
> Out[5]= 2 + 2

___\_/___   Paulo Mouat,
   ___      mouat at

  • Prev by Date: Re: Expanding function names to explicit formulas
  • Next by Date: Re: Converting Excel table to Mathematica matrix.
  • Previous by thread: Re: Forcing 'Plus' to format nicely
  • Next by thread: Solving