Combining pure functions containing compound expressions












1














Background



For display purposes, I sometimes find it desirable to defeat Mathematica's canonical ordering of variables, and instead have it output terms in the order in which I type them. E.g., instead of this:



b-a

v=v0+a t

a8+a9+a10



–a + b



a t + v0



a10 + a8 + a9




...I'd prefer this:




b – a



v0 + a t



a8 + a9 + a10




This can be easily accomplished by removing the Orderless attributes from Plus and Times, entering the expression, and then immediately restoring those attributes (it is important to do the latter, since their absence alters basic functionality; e.g., without Orderless, Plus doesn't recognize that a + b is mathematically identical to b + a).



ClearAttributes[Plus, Orderless]

ClearAttributes[Times, Orderless]

c (b-a)

SetAttributes[Plus, Orderless]

SetAttributes[Times, Orderless]



c (b – a)




Question



How do I implement the above as a function? I.e., I'd like to define a function such that:



func[c (b-a)]

c (b-a) (*confirm that Orderless is restored to both Plus and Times*)



c (b – a)



(–a + b) c




Thus far I've only managed the following, which achieves the desired output, but requires I enter a function, then the expression, then another function:



func1 := (ClearAttributes[Plus, Orderless]; ClearAttributes[Times, Orderless]) &;

func2 := (SetAttributes[Plus, Orderless]; SetAttributes[Times, Orderless]) &;

func1[_]; c (b-a)

func2[_]

c (b-a)



c (b – a)



(–a + b) c




How do I combine these into a single function that takes the expression as its argument?



EDIT: Note that I want to alter only the display format, not any other functionality. E.g., MMA should still recognize that e1 and e2 are mathematically equivalent:



func1[_]

e1 = c (b - a)

e2 = (-a + b) c

func2[_]

e1 == e2



c (b - a)



(-a + b) c



True







output-formatting sorting output canonicalization







share|improve this question





























    1














    Background



    For display purposes, I sometimes find it desirable to defeat Mathematica's canonical ordering of variables, and instead have it output terms in the order in which I type them. E.g., instead of this:



    b-a
    
v=v0+a t
    
a8+a9+a10



    –a + b



    a t + v0



    a10 + a8 + a9




    ...I'd prefer this:




    b – a



    v0 + a t



    a8 + a9 + a10




    This can be easily accomplished by removing the Orderless attributes from Plus and Times, entering the expression, and then immediately restoring those attributes (it is important to do the latter, since their absence alters basic functionality; e.g., without Orderless, Plus doesn't recognize that a + b is mathematically identical to b + a).



    ClearAttributes[Plus, Orderless]
    
ClearAttributes[Times, Orderless]
    
c (b-a)
    
SetAttributes[Plus, Orderless]
    
SetAttributes[Times, Orderless]



    c (b – a)




    Question



    How do I implement the above as a function? I.e., I'd like to define a function such that:



    func[c (b-a)]
    
c (b-a) (*confirm that Orderless is restored to both Plus and Times*)



    c (b – a)



    (–a + b) c




    Thus far I've only managed the following, which achieves the desired output, but requires I enter a function, then the expression, then another function:



    func1 := (ClearAttributes[Plus, Orderless]; ClearAttributes[Times, Orderless]) &;
    
func2 := (SetAttributes[Plus, Orderless]; SetAttributes[Times, Orderless]) &;
    
func1[_]; c (b-a)
    
func2[_]
    
c (b-a)



    c (b – a)



    (–a + b) c




    How do I combine these into a single function that takes the expression as its argument?



    EDIT: Note that I want to alter only the display format, not any other functionality. E.g., MMA should still recognize that e1 and e2 are mathematically equivalent:



    func1[_]
    
e1 = c (b - a)
    
e2 = (-a + b) c
    
func2[_]
    
e1 == e2



    c (b - a)



    (-a + b) c



    True







    output-formatting sorting output canonicalization







    share|improve this question



























      1












      1








      1







      Background



      For display purposes, I sometimes find it desirable to defeat Mathematica's canonical ordering of variables, and instead have it output terms in the order in which I type them. E.g., instead of this:



      b-a
      
v=v0+a t
      
a8+a9+a10



      –a + b



      a t + v0



      a10 + a8 + a9




      ...I'd prefer this:




      b – a



      v0 + a t



      a8 + a9 + a10




      This can be easily accomplished by removing the Orderless attributes from Plus and Times, entering the expression, and then immediately restoring those attributes (it is important to do the latter, since their absence alters basic functionality; e.g., without Orderless, Plus doesn't recognize that a + b is mathematically identical to b + a).



      ClearAttributes[Plus, Orderless]
      
ClearAttributes[Times, Orderless]
      
c (b-a)
      
SetAttributes[Plus, Orderless]
      
SetAttributes[Times, Orderless]



      c (b – a)




      Question



      How do I implement the above as a function? I.e., I'd like to define a function such that:



      func[c (b-a)]
      
c (b-a) (*confirm that Orderless is restored to both Plus and Times*)



      c (b – a)



      (–a + b) c




      Thus far I've only managed the following, which achieves the desired output, but requires I enter a function, then the expression, then another function:



      func1 := (ClearAttributes[Plus, Orderless]; ClearAttributes[Times, Orderless]) &;
      
func2 := (SetAttributes[Plus, Orderless]; SetAttributes[Times, Orderless]) &;
      
func1[_]; c (b-a)
      
func2[_]
      
c (b-a)



      c (b – a)



      (–a + b) c




      How do I combine these into a single function that takes the expression as its argument?



      EDIT: Note that I want to alter only the display format, not any other functionality. E.g., MMA should still recognize that e1 and e2 are mathematically equivalent:



      func1[_]
      
e1 = c (b - a)
      
e2 = (-a + b) c
      
func2[_]
      
e1 == e2



      c (b - a)



      (-a + b) c



      True







      output-formatting sorting output canonicalization







      share|improve this question















      Background



      For display purposes, I sometimes find it desirable to defeat Mathematica's canonical ordering of variables, and instead have it output terms in the order in which I type them. E.g., instead of this:



      b-a
      
v=v0+a t
      
a8+a9+a10



      –a + b



      a t + v0



      a10 + a8 + a9




      ...I'd prefer this:




      b – a



      v0 + a t



      a8 + a9 + a10




      This can be easily accomplished by removing the Orderless attributes from Plus and Times, entering the expression, and then immediately restoring those attributes (it is important to do the latter, since their absence alters basic functionality; e.g., without Orderless, Plus doesn't recognize that a + b is mathematically identical to b + a).



      ClearAttributes[Plus, Orderless]
      
ClearAttributes[Times, Orderless]
      
c (b-a)
      
SetAttributes[Plus, Orderless]
      
SetAttributes[Times, Orderless]



      c (b – a)




      Question



      How do I implement the above as a function? I.e., I'd like to define a function such that:



      func[c (b-a)]
      
c (b-a) (*confirm that Orderless is restored to both Plus and Times*)



      c (b – a)



      (–a + b) c




      Thus far I've only managed the following, which achieves the desired output, but requires I enter a function, then the expression, then another function:



      func1 := (ClearAttributes[Plus, Orderless]; ClearAttributes[Times, Orderless]) &;
      
func2 := (SetAttributes[Plus, Orderless]; SetAttributes[Times, Orderless]) &;
      
func1[_]; c (b-a)
      
func2[_]
      
c (b-a)



      c (b – a)



      (–a + b) c




      How do I combine these into a single function that takes the expression as its argument?



      EDIT: Note that I want to alter only the display format, not any other functionality. E.g., MMA should still recognize that e1 and e2 are mathematically equivalent:



      func1[_]
      
e1 = c (b - a)
      
e2 = (-a + b) c
      
func2[_]
      
e1 == e2



      c (b - a)



      (-a + b) c



      True







      output-formatting sorting output canonicalization




      output-formatting sorting output canonicalization






      share|improve this question















      share|improve this question













      share|improve this question




      share|improve this question








      edited 2 hours ago

























      asked 4 hours ago









      theorist

      1,077420




      1,077420






















          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          4














          You could define a format that does this for you:



          SetAttributes[orderlessForm, HoldFirst]
          

          
MakeBoxes[orderlessForm[expr_], form_] ^:= Internal`InheritedBlock[{Times, Plus},
          
    ClearAttributes[{Times, Plus}, Orderless];
          
    MakeBoxes[expr, form]
          
]


          Then:



          orderlessForm[c (b - a)]



          c (b - a)




          And, the usual output when not using the wrapper:



          c (b - a)



          (-a + b) c




          Note that the HoldFirst attribute does most of the work.






          share|improve this answer





















          • Thanks Carl. One problem I notice is that orderlessForm alters some functionality. E.g., e1 = orderlessForm[a + b]; e2 = orderlessForm[b + a]; e1 == e2 gives a + b == b + a instead of True. I've added an edit at the end of my question to make this requirement explicit.
            – theorist
            2 hours ago











          Your Answer





          StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
          return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
          StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
          StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
          });
          });
          }, "mathjax-editing");

          StackExchange.ready(function() {
          var channelOptions = {
          tags: "".split(" "),
          id: "387"
          };
          initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

          StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
          // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
          if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
          StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
          createEditor();
          });
          }
          else {
          createEditor();
          }
          });

          function createEditor() {
          StackExchange.prepareEditor({
          heartbeatType: 'answer',
          autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
          convertImagesToLinks: false,
          noModals: true,
          showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
          reputationToPostImages: null,
          bindNavPrevention: true,
          postfix: "",
          imageUploader: {
          brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
          contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
          allowUrls: true
          },
          onDemand: true,
          discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
          ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
          });


          }
          });














          draft saved

          draft discarded


















          StackExchange.ready(
          function () {
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmathematica.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f188576%2fcombining-pure-functions-containing-compound-expressions%23new-answer', 'question_page');
          }
          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown

























          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes








          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes









          active

          oldest

          votes






          active

          oldest

          votes









          4














          You could define a format that does this for you:



          SetAttributes[orderlessForm, HoldFirst]
          

          
MakeBoxes[orderlessForm[expr_], form_] ^:= Internal`InheritedBlock[{Times, Plus},
          
    ClearAttributes[{Times, Plus}, Orderless];
          
    MakeBoxes[expr, form]
          
]


          Then:



          orderlessForm[c (b - a)]



          c (b - a)




          And, the usual output when not using the wrapper:



          c (b - a)



          (-a + b) c




          Note that the HoldFirst attribute does most of the work.






          share|improve this answer





















          • Thanks Carl. One problem I notice is that orderlessForm alters some functionality. E.g., e1 = orderlessForm[a + b]; e2 = orderlessForm[b + a]; e1 == e2 gives a + b == b + a instead of True. I've added an edit at the end of my question to make this requirement explicit.
            – theorist
            2 hours ago
















          4














          You could define a format that does this for you:



          SetAttributes[orderlessForm, HoldFirst]
          

          
MakeBoxes[orderlessForm[expr_], form_] ^:= Internal`InheritedBlock[{Times, Plus},
          
    ClearAttributes[{Times, Plus}, Orderless];
          
    MakeBoxes[expr, form]
          
]


          Then:



          orderlessForm[c (b - a)]



          c (b - a)




          And, the usual output when not using the wrapper:



          c (b - a)



          (-a + b) c




          Note that the HoldFirst attribute does most of the work.






          share|improve this answer





















          • Thanks Carl. One problem I notice is that orderlessForm alters some functionality. E.g., e1 = orderlessForm[a + b]; e2 = orderlessForm[b + a]; e1 == e2 gives a + b == b + a instead of True. I've added an edit at the end of my question to make this requirement explicit.
            – theorist
            2 hours ago














          4












          4








          4






          You could define a format that does this for you:



          SetAttributes[orderlessForm, HoldFirst]
          

          
MakeBoxes[orderlessForm[expr_], form_] ^:= Internal`InheritedBlock[{Times, Plus},
          
    ClearAttributes[{Times, Plus}, Orderless];
          
    MakeBoxes[expr, form]
          
]


          Then:



          orderlessForm[c (b - a)]



          c (b - a)




          And, the usual output when not using the wrapper:



          c (b - a)



          (-a + b) c




          Note that the HoldFirst attribute does most of the work.






          share|improve this answer












          You could define a format that does this for you:



          SetAttributes[orderlessForm, HoldFirst]
          

          
MakeBoxes[orderlessForm[expr_], form_] ^:= Internal`InheritedBlock[{Times, Plus},
          
    ClearAttributes[{Times, Plus}, Orderless];
          
    MakeBoxes[expr, form]
          
]


          Then:



          orderlessForm[c (b - a)]



          c (b - a)




          And, the usual output when not using the wrapper:



          c (b - a)



          (-a + b) c




          Note that the HoldFirst attribute does most of the work.







          share|improve this answer












          share|improve this answer



          share|improve this answer










          answered 3 hours ago









          Carl Woll

          67k387175




          67k387175












          • Thanks Carl. One problem I notice is that orderlessForm alters some functionality. E.g., e1 = orderlessForm[a + b]; e2 = orderlessForm[b + a]; e1 == e2 gives a + b == b + a instead of True. I've added an edit at the end of my question to make this requirement explicit.
            – theorist
            2 hours ago


















          • Thanks Carl. One problem I notice is that orderlessForm alters some functionality. E.g., e1 = orderlessForm[a + b]; e2 = orderlessForm[b + a]; e1 == e2 gives a + b == b + a instead of True. I've added an edit at the end of my question to make this requirement explicit.
            – theorist
            2 hours ago
















          Thanks Carl. One problem I notice is that orderlessForm alters some functionality. E.g., e1 = orderlessForm[a + b]; e2 = orderlessForm[b + a]; e1 == e2 gives a + b == b + a instead of True. I've added an edit at the end of my question to make this requirement explicit.
          – theorist
          2 hours ago




          Thanks Carl. One problem I notice is that orderlessForm alters some functionality. E.g., e1 = orderlessForm[a + b]; e2 = orderlessForm[b + a]; e1 == e2 gives a + b == b + a instead of True. I've added an edit at the end of my question to make this requirement explicit.
          – theorist
          2 hours ago


















          draft saved

          draft discarded




















































          Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematica Stack Exchange!


          • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

          But avoid …



          • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

          • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


          Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


          To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.





          Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.


          Please pay close attention to the following guidance:


          • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

          But avoid …



          • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

          • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


          To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




          draft saved


          draft discarded














          StackExchange.ready(
          function () {
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmathematica.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f188576%2fcombining-pure-functions-containing-compound-expressions%23new-answer', 'question_page');
          }
          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown





















































          Required, but never shown














          Required, but never shown












          Required, but never shown







          Required, but never shown

































          Required, but never shown














          Required, but never shown












          Required, but never shown







          Required, but never shown







          -

          Popular posts from this blog

          Bundesstraße 106

          Image
          Dieser Artikel beschreibt die Bundesstraße 106 in Deutschland. Zur gleichnamigen Straße in Österreich siehe Mölltal Straße. Vorlage:Infobox hochrangige Straße/Wartung/DE-B Bundesstraße 106 in Deutschland Karte Basisdaten Betreiber: Deutschland  Bundesrepublik Deutschland Straßenbeginn: Wismar ( 53° 54′  N , 11° 24′  O 53.900536 11.396875 ) Straßenende: Schwerin ( 53° 36′  N , 11° 24′  O 53.592785 11.404892 ) Gesamtlänge: 40,7 km Bundesland: Mecklenburg-Vorpommern Ausbauzustand: zweistreifig [1] Bundesstraße 106 in Schwerin (Umgehungsstraße) Straßenverlauf Land Mecklenburg-Vorpommern Landkreis Nordwestmecklenburg Ortsumgehung Wismar Wallensteingraben über   Dorf Mecklenburg Wallensteingraben Groß Stieten Bad Kleinen OT Niendorf Bahnstrecke Lübeck–Bad Kleinen Zickhusen Lübstorf Klein Trebbow OT Kirch Stück ...
          Read more

          Verónica Boquete

          Image
          Verónica Boquete im Trikot der Nationalmannschaft (2013) Personalia Name Verónica Boquete Giadans Geburtstag 9. April 1987 Geburtsort Santiago de Compostela, Spanien Größe 159 cm Position Mittelfeld / Sturm Juniorinnen Jahre Station 2001–2005 Xuventú Aguiño Frauen Jahre Station Spiele (Tore) 1 2005–2008 Prainsa Zaragoza 83 (40) 2008–2010 Espanyol Barcelona 53 (30) 2010 Buffalo Flash 9 0 (9) 2010 Chicago Red Stars 3 0 (1) 2010–2011 Espanyol Barcelona 26 (41) 2011 Philadelphia Independence 13 0 (5) 2011 Energija Woronesch 5 0 (1) 2012–2014 Tyresö FF 39 (14) 2014 Portland Thorns FC 15 0 (4) 2014–2015 1. FFC Frankfurt 23 0 (7) 2015–2016 FC Bayern München 9 0 (0) 2016–2018 Paris Saint-Germain 31 0 (8) 2018 Peking BG Phoenix 2019– Utah Royals FC 0 0 (0) Nationalmannschaft Jahre Auswahl ...
          Read more

          Ida-Boy-Ed-Garten

          Image
          Die Lage des Ida-Boy-Ed-Gartens, rot markiert Der Ida-Boy-Ed-Garten Der Ida-Boy-Ed-Garten, Blick von der Wakenitzmauer durch das Tor in der Stadtmauer Der Ida-Boy-Ed-Garten ist eine Straße der Lübecker Altstadt. Inhaltsverzeichnis 1 Lage 2 Geschichte 3 Literatur 4 Weblinks Lage | Der etwa 90 Meter lange Ida-Boy-Ed-Garten befindet sich an der nördlichen Spitze der Altstadtinsel, vor dem Burgtor. Die in einem Bogen durch eine Grünanlage hangaufwärts führende Straße verbindet die Wakenitzmauer mit der Burgtorbrücke. Geschichte | Der heutige Ida-Boy-Ed-Garten wurde ursprünglich als Verlängerung der Wakenitzmauer angelegt. 1903 wurde in den erhaltenen Teil der mittelalterlichen Stadtmauer, an dem die Wakenitzmauer bei der Einmündung der Kaiserstraße begann, ein Tor mit einem großen Bogen für die Durchführung der Straße und zwei kleineren seitlichen Öffnungen für Fußgänger gebrochen, um für die neu errichteten Wohnhäuser in diesem Bereich ...
          Read more