Re: Through[Divide[f1, f2][x]]
- To: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net
- Subject: [mg130954] Re: Through[Divide[f1, f2][x]]
- From: Ray Koopman <koopman at sfu.ca>
- Date: Tue, 28 May 2013 04:18:29 -0400 (EDT)
- Delivered-to: l-mathgroup@mail-archive0.wolfram.com
- Delivered-to: l-mathgroup@wolfram.com
- Delivered-to: mathgroup-outx@smc.vnet.net
- Delivered-to: mathgroup-newsendx@smc.vnet.net
On Sun, May 26, 2013 @ 11:23 AM, Andrzej Kozlowski <akozlowski at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 26 May 2013, at 11:06, Ray Koopman <koopman at sfu.ca> wrote:
>
>> Either of these will give you f1[x]/f2[x]:
>>
>> Divide@@{f1@#,f2@#}&@x
>>
>> Divide@@(#@x&)/@{f1,f2}
>>
>> Sometimes it would be nice to have a "reverse map", that
>> applied each of a list of functions to a single argument,
>> instead of a single function to each of a list of arguments.
>
> I am not sure I understand what you mean. Why doesn't Through do that?
>
> Through[{f, g, h}[x]]
>
> {f[x], g[x], h[x]}
>
> Andrzej Kozlowski
Through does do that. When I saw Bob's response to the original post
I asked myself "How did I miss that?" I thought I had tried it and
found that it didn't work. The only explanation I can think of is
that I had the "reverse map" metaphor fixed too firmly in my mind,
to the point that I used Map-like syntax [{f1,f2},x] instead of
[{f1,f2}@x].