« first day (2927 days earlier)   

6:57 AM
I suppose that there must have been other discussions about this - perhaps the users of this room can give some pointers for the OP: Why there is no special community for Maple and Matlab on stackexchange.
Computational Science also has matlab tag - but I wasn't sure whether I should mention that site. (I am not familiar with the site, so I don't really know what kind of questions it accepts.)
7:49 AM
Though this answers why there is MMA.SE.
8:12 AM
BTW I see that the same user, who asked the question on Meta Stack Exchange, is also active on this site: mathematica.stackexchange.com/users/42417/go-with-the-wind
8:46 AM
@CarlLange you have a web dev background, right? I was thinking about adding a professional string/localization management to one of packages I am working on. And web is a good place to get an inspiration from. I wasn't able to find a comprehensive overview of features and best practices. Only articles describing specific aspects. Do you know any?
So e.g. what should MyPackageString[token] support and what is a convenient way to setup sources for it etc etc.
@Kuba Yep, I do have that background, but I'm afraid I don't have anything very useful for you here
Usually I'd just use the most popular or built-in-to-the-framework library, eg for react, github.com/formatjs/react-intl
To my eye it usually ends up just being a question of a dictionary somewhere with developer-written keys and translator-written translations. 🤷‍♂️
@MartinSleziak There are so many unhelpful responses on those questions that it makes me very glad to be a member of this community and not one of those...
9:04 AM
@CarlLange ok, thanks :)
9:23 AM
@Kuba WordPress uses POT files. It's probably not at least a disadvantage to use a well known format like that.
9:51 AM
@C.E. thanks, will take a look.
2 hours later…
12:18 PM
So I have a bunch of lines that mostly overlap and then split off. I would really like to do something better than giving each line Opacity[0.2] to show clearly how much they overlap, because you lose detail after five overlaps. Does anyone know a clever way offhand?
(Above is Opacity[0.2])
1 hour later…
1:41 PM
@CarlLange You could rasterize the result and change an appropriate ColorFunction to cover a bigger range of colors than only gray tones
Alternatively, you could cut the lines into segments, do something like Counts[segments] and use the resulting information to adjust the thickness/style of each segment according to the count of that segment. This assumes of course that the segments of the individual curves are actually the same/similar enough to make grouping feasible and meaningful
> So I have a bunch of lines that mostly overlap
How many is "a bunch" roughly?
If it is only for visual representation, then using a color gradient will help. Humans can differentiate between something like 20-30 gray values. But I'm sure that doesn't work for such small lines. If you have a rainbow gradient, that would help.
1 hour later…
2:58 PM
@halirutan 500-1000.
@LukasLang Those are great suggestions, thanks!
Is there a way to prevent unit simplification during unit conversions when possible, in order to avoid ambiguity? For example, in the following cases:
1) https://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=meter%2Ffeet+to+meter%2Fmeter
2) https://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=meter%2Fmeter+to+meter%2Ffeet

Intuitively people might expect (2) to be the inverse of (1)

I understand why the behaviour of (2) is correct though: the meter units cancel, and now the dimensionless quantity can just "become" meter/feet
I'm also wondering what this ambiguity means mathematically when considering mathematical properties of dimensional analysis (for example, the abelian group described in en.wikipedia.org/wiki/…)
3:54 PM
@grovesNL Mathematica gives more useful answers:
UnitConvert[Quantity[1, "meter/meter"], "meter/feet"]
(* Quantity[381/1250, ("Meters")/("Feet")] *)

UnitConvert[Quantity[1, "meter/feet"], "m/m"]
(* Quantity[1250/381, ("Meters")/("Meters")] *)
Interesting :) I thought Mathematica would match WolframAlpha here
It seems like Mathematica and WolframAlpha also have this ambiguity then
Regarding the ambiguity: There really is none - 381/1250m/ft=1m/m=1, and 1250/381m/m=1m/ft=1250/381 are both correct in a strict mathematical sense
The group described in the wikipedia article does not really apply here - there, only abstract units like length or time are considered, not concrete units like meters or feet
All quantities in your example have the same unit, i.e. 1 (i.e. L^0*M^0*T^0…) in the sense of that group
You can also ask Mathematica to convert the quantities above to SI units:
UnitConvert[Quantity[1, "meter/meter"], "meter/feet"] // UnitConvert
(* 1 *)

UnitConvert[Quantity[1, "meter/feet"], "m/m"] // UnitConvert
(* 1250/381 *)
4:24 PM
Right, I agree both conversion paths are correct so maybe ambiguity isn't the best word for it
I was considering the quantities in my examples to each be L^1/L^1, with the solution varying dependent on whether they're immediately simplified to L^0
4:45 PM
What exactly do you mean by "the solution varying"? Varying in what sense? Just in how they are presented?
5:32 PM
I see what you mean now, thanks!
I was misunderstanding the WolframAlpha result in the second case -- I thought the unit was still implied, but the displayed result actually means 1 (unitless), not 1 (meter/feet)

« first day (2927 days earlier)