@Searke Win7 V11:

Anyone interested in playing with the new Neural Network capabilities in Mathematica 11 ? I think I have found a interesting toy example to work (see mathematica.stackexchange.com/questions/124769/…)

Where can I find NautyTools?

2014 Mathematica so version 10?

Moved this to the main, here.

@Kuba Oh. That's strange.

I forwarded the problem to the right people.

And for what it's worth, I use infix syntax all the time when writing tests. Particularly with MatchQ and stuff. But I don't see anyone else doing it.

@Searke Thx. I use it only for those declarations, ortherwise I somehow can't keep consistent identing for longer code :) the worst is /.

Good.

People need to use "/." less

*indenting

@Searke due to efficiency?

No. I'm not big on efficiency.

It's because it's an inherently ambiguous operation

It's very often used instead of Map or Lookup

when those have very clear semantics.

90% of the time that I see "/." the programmer meant something rather specific to be done than a general replacement. And it's a huge source of hard to debug problems.

@Searke oh, then your wish is poorly worded, you meant "only when needed" ;)

Yes. But I think even then. I often write out "Replace" because it should be used so rarely

You can often profitably hunt for bugs by simply just searching for "/." in source code and working out how to make it do something its writer didn't intend.

@Searke I see. Fortunately I don't have to debug others code lately so I don't have any thoughts about that.

The Visual Studio gives the suggestion memory.h, while when I google the keyword memcpy, I found that the corresponding header file is string.h. Any suggestion?

In addtion, when I compile the source code without the header file string.h, Mathematica gives me a correct DLL file. Very odd!

@JasonB Do you think Wolfram would provide a Raspberry Pi license unlocked for more than 16 kernels?

Is there a limit currently for the number of kernels you can run at once?

@Young - I would make a post over at community.wolfram.com, people who know a lot more than me in that area do watch the community. community.wolfram.com/content?curTag=raspberry%20pi

@Young Why do you want to do that?

Honsetly, I would send an email to [email protected]. I don't think anyone knows. outside of customer service or salespeople. It's just not common.

I'm currently using

Dynamic@ReleaseHold@If[x,
   Hold[true],
   Hold[false]
   ]

to toggle between two expressions. If x is initially true then it's important that it doesn't evaluate the false statement, and vice versa. This I have achieved. However every time I toggle between true and false it reevaluates the expressions, I don't want that either. I would prefer that the first time it's false, it evaluates that and keeps that value.

What I'm currently experimenting with is memoization:

memoizedIf[x_, true_, false_] :=
 memoizedIf[x, true, false] = ReleaseHold@If[x, true, false]

It doesn't work, and I don't like it too much either since true and false can be large, complex expressions.

So, just throwing this out there, does anyone have a solution to this problem?