Search All of the Math Forum:
Views expressed in these public forums are not endorsed by
Drexel University or The Math Forum.
|
|
|
|
Re: Mathematica and Lisp
Posted:
Mar 5, 2013 4:16 AM
|
|
On 04/03/2013 03:57, Richard Fateman wrote:
> ? @@@
>
> returns Information::nomatch
Well it would - the ? operator works on function names, not their
operator equivalents.
>
> To use your method I must remove at least one hand from the keyboard,
> scramble around to find
> the mouse and then hit f1 and then return my hand to the keyboard in
> order to get the documentation.
Hmm - that sounds like a lot of work!
?
>
> As for @@@ being explained multiple times in this newsgroup, maybe you
> should wonder why
> (a) it should have to be explained even once
Well I guess if everyone read and understood the entire documentation
before posting on the newsgroup, 90% of the threads would vanish - but
that would be true of just about all software support newsgroups.
> (b) why it should have to be explained multiple times.
Probably because people don't scan the entire back history of posts,
before asking their question!
>
> Maybe it is not the most useful operation? Maybe it is not the most
> euphonious operator?
I do think Mathematica could usefully exploit more extended characters
as synonyms for operators like @@@ - just as they do for :> etc.
It is important to realise that anyone can understand any expression
involving operators by using Hold and FullForm:
(f @@@ g) // Hold // FullForm
Hold[Apply[f,g,List[1]]]
David Bailey
http://www.dbaileyconsultancy.co.uk
|
|
|
|
