Re: Redudant code for style purposes?
- To: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net
- Subject: [mg132578] Re: Redudant code for style purposes?
- From: Murray Eisenberg <murray at math.umass.edu>
- Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2014 05:25:50 -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
- References: <20140413092737.B651E6A38@smc.vnet.net>
Correct, the "List @@ " is redundant there. Moreover, if you use the entire original list "array"-- that is, if you change the Table expression to
Table[array[[i ;; i + 1]], {i, 1, 19}]]
--, then there's no need to use indexing or Table at all, just Partition with a third argument to indicate overlap:
arr = RandomReal[{0, 10}, 20];
Partition[arr, 2, 1]
On Apr 13, 2014, at 5:27 AM, andymhancock at gmail.com wrote:
> The Mathematica Cookbook has an example:
>
> array = RandomReal[{0, 10}, 20]
> Table[List @@ array[[i ;; i + 1]], {i, 1, 16}]
>
> I'm new to Mathematica, but to me, the "List @@" seems redundant. The
> statements give the same results if I remove it. Is there a reason
> for this, either functionally or for clarity?
>
Murray Eisenberg murray at math.umass.edu
Mathematics & Statistics Dept.
Lederle Graduate Research Tower phone 240 246-7240 (H)
University of Massachusetts
710 North Pleasant Street
Amherst, MA 01003-9305
- References:
- Redudant code for style purposes?
- From: andymhancock@gmail.com
- Redudant code for style purposes?