@Guillochon Yes, there was a question on that... In short, Show uses settings of the first plot and depending on which one you used first, the "TransparentPolygonMesh" -> True option must be interfering with your other plot. See this (probably the opposite of yours):
Let us first define two positive definite matrices:
M1 = {{2, -6}, {4, 8}};
M2 = {{2, 3}, {4, 8}};
then set two points p1={-1,-1} and p2={1,1}. Finally we define an anisotropic distance function, namely:
d[q1_, q2_, M_] := Sqrt[(q1 - q2).M.(q1 - q2)]
When trying to plot the anisotropic Voro...
anyone else having hard time to login to Mathematica at Stackoverflow from Firefox? For some strange reason, using FF, I login via my account, but it keep saying page is being redirected and I never login. But I can login to Mathematica on stackexchange just fine. When I try Chrom, I can login to both site OK. Here is a screen shot
Then when I am redirected, I find I am not logged in at all. Say I keep doing this over and over, same result.
@István Trick question: without looking in the docs, which commonly used operator has higher precedence than [ ]? I.e. a OP b[] would be (a OP b)[] ;-)
@IstvánZachar Interesting find. Even more interesting that it returns 2 and not True.
@IstvánZachar I think what happens is that M punted out. (is this the right word?). If you type And[2] you get 2, and if you type And[x] you get x. Basically, if it can't decide is a boolean, it returns it back. And[1, 2] gives 1&&2 and simplify just decided this is 2 :)
@IstvánZachar Oh I understand now. So 1==True, 0==False, any other integer is just an integer. I thought 2 would be True as well.
I was looking at the set problem you posted and tried things like set_ ? contains[{1,2}]. But that is interpreted as (set_ ? contains)[{1,2}] ... surprise
Here's what is happening; everytime I go to Stack Overflow (stackoverflow.com, NOT meta) with Firefox, it gives me the "Welcome back" tab that pops up from the top. Whenever I click in the "click here to refresh the page" link, all it does is refresh the page without logging me back in.
Even if ...
@IstvánZachar, yes I agree something fishy here with this behaviour. May be a language laywer will have better insight. Why not post at the main board. it is a good question
Even if it's not a bug, I'd like to see it as a question just to draw more attention to it. It is something unexpected. It's another thing how to make it into an actual question ...
This is where the Q/A format is not so convenient ... I very much want to hear about these unexpected things, but it's difficult to hammer this into an answerable question ...
For the very short lists involved in the application this may well be the fastest way, but I'm wondering if this operation might be done better on longer lists. I can use ArrayFlatten[{{s1, set}}] to get the diagonal efficiently, but I cannot think of a good way to fill out the array.
Can you think of any better method to get the output shown above?
Same question for you @Oleksandr or anyone else lurking.
@Mr.Wizard MapAt and Prepend are not a good formula for performance, granted, but I think they are probably the clearest solution if this is the output you need
@Szabolcs Use is inside KSetPhere. In that application the order of the elements of each row are flexible; one could also Delete and Prepend the pairs ({s1, x}) which is actually the order of the Combinatorica function I believe.
I'm still (also) interested in this particular diagonal pattern for its own sake.
@OleksandrR. Ignoring "clearest" is there something faster?
By the way, I know MapAt and Prependcan be slow but I think for their specific uses they are competitive.
@Mr.Wizard not sure. For this kind of thing I would usually go for something with ConstantArray and Flattenbut since you need to operate on the diagonal it's not so easy
@OleksandrR. Well in particular I'm confused because MachinePrecision is about 16, but even with N[number,2] it gives the correct value, (not some overflowing looking thing) And why only for the specific value MachinePrecision does N not keep track of its precision
@OleksandrR. nevermind, I read the docs again, missed this the first time: "N[e,p] works adaptively using arbitrary-precision numbers when p is not MachinePrecision:"
For a requested precision of 2 the actual working precision will be whatever turned out to be necessary to give you two correct digits. MachinePrecision is special because it is used for speed, and precision tracking is quite expensive... if you want the same precision but with precision tracking switched on, specify $MachinePrecision instead
I have a two argument function, f[probability_,x_]:=... I want to output what the probability passed to it was as well as the expression the function returns, i.e. f[Random[],5] Probability = 5 normal function output I've come up with, f[...]:={prob,...} but it's ugly and I'd rather not want a list returned.
I'd like some textual output as well as the symbolic expression the function returns
Let us first define two positive definite matrices:
M1 = {{2, -6}, {4, 8}};
M2 = {{2, 3}, {4, 8}};
then set two points p1={-1,-1} and p2={1,1}. Finally we define an anisotropic distance function, namely:
d[q1_, q2_, M_] := Sqrt[(q1 - q2).M.(q1 - q2)]
When trying to plot the anisotropic Voro...
Per this chat discussion and this previous question where I encountered the strange behaviour:
Simplify[1] ==> 1
And[0, 1] ==> 0 && 1
Simplify[And[2, 3]] ==> 2 && 3
Simplify[Not[0]] ==> !0
Simplify[And[0, 1]] ==> False (* expected 0 &a...
