wolfram-mathematica

Maybe someone can explain to me why Replace gives a different answer than ReplaceAll , even though I am using one rule, and, I think, I have one expression. According to the documentation: ReplaceAll looks at each part of expr, tries all the rules on it, and then goes on to the next part of expr. The first rule that applies to a particular part is used; no further rules are tried on that part, or on any of its subparts and for Replace A list of rules can be given. The rules are tried in order. The result of the first one that applies is returned. If none of the rules apply, the original expr

TLDR : How do I get CapsLock to translate to "ShortNameDelimiter" in Mma 7? I like pretty text in my mma notebooks, and often define functions as f[\[Alpha]_] =... so as to match the exact equation that I'm working with. As such, it involves a lot of Esc - letter - Esc sequences, and reaching for Esc every other stroke breaks my flow of typing. Now, the CapsLock key is seldom used (I can't remember the last time I needed it), but conveniently placed (your pinky is right there!). Remapping it to Esc on vim worked wonders for me and I was wondering if there was a way to do the same in mma ,

In regard to performance and scalability in package design, is it best to: … ‘overload’ function names (letting Mathematica sort out which version to use based on patterns/conditions/tests and the way the system orders definitions)? … or to construct a single function with a Switch[] (or similar command) to direct evaluation? Mathematica’s expressiveness frequently confuses me with silly (?) issues like this. This is a broad question, but I will take this opportunity to give a broad answer... I advocate that one should embrace the principal paradigm of a programming language, rather than

I'm new to R, and I just discovered I suffer from Bracket Phobia (see comment in the link). I like the way magrittr notation %>% works, because it avoids nested parenthesis in some situations, and makes code more readable. I came from Mathematica , where there is a very similar native // notation to do what %>% does. Here are some R and Mathematica comparisons: #R Notation c(1.5,-2.3,3.4) %>% round %>% abs %>% sum #Mathematica Notation {1.5,-2.3,3.4}//Round//Abs//Total So far so good, but, my question is: Is there some way to mimic Mathematica @ notation , with right-to-left associativity in R

I find this a bit annoying. I make a 3D plot, initially it come up in the default orientation. Then, using the mouse, I rotate it some way. Now I run the command again, expecting to obtain the original shape (i.e the original orientation before I rotated it by mouse), but instead, it just gives me the same plot I have on the screen, i.e. it seems to have kept/remembered the last viewpoint in that output cell. I wanted it to go back to the original viewpoint. So, I delete the output cell to make it happen. Do you think this is how it is supposed to work? Having to keep deleting the cell output