314 reputation
29
bio website linkedin.com/in/agravier
location Singapore
age 29
visits member for 2 years, 8 months
seen Dec 8 '13 at 12:09

I do research in computational neuroscience for my phd. I used to work as software engineer. I also did some research in the supervision of autonomous mobile social robots. I started using Mathematica recently (Jan. 2012), but I can understand faster if you make the parallel with programming in Python, Java, Clojure, Common Lisp, Objective Caml, or C. I tend to be an FOSS advocate, but I appreciate the power of Mathematica.


Jul
21
awarded  Popular Question
Nov
20
awarded  Nice Question
Jan
18
awarded  Yearling
Jun
30
awarded  Taxonomist
May
5
accepted How to avoid conflicts between local variable names and symbolic arguments in Block constructs?
May
5
revised How to avoid conflicts between local variable names and symbolic arguments in Block constructs?
Fixed misinformation
May
5
comment How to avoid conflicts between local variable names and symbolic arguments in Block constructs?
Thanks, I actually can use Module, I was confused. I will edit my question to clarify that and accept your answer :)
May
5
comment How to avoid conflicts between local variable names and symbolic arguments in Block constructs?
I found why I didn't use Module. Not that I encountered any error myself, but I read math.stackexchange.com/a/28904 and half-understood that there is some sort of closure leakage when using Module.
May
4
comment How to avoid conflicts between local variable names and symbolic arguments in Block constructs?
@ruebenko @celtschk @Szabolcs @LeonidShifrin Thank you for your comments; Apart from the $RecursionLimit thing, I remember a problem with the scope of the local variables created with Module vs. Block. I can't b more precise because I'm not sufficiently proficient in Mathematica :) I will need to look it up when I can access my Mathematica.
May
4
asked How to avoid conflicts between local variable names and symbolic arguments in Block constructs?
Feb
3
accepted Difficulties in creating strict and robust equivalence between two symbols using the Notation package
Feb
3
comment Difficulties in creating strict and robust equivalence between two symbols using the Notation package
Yes, thanks. Anyway, your solution to this question is spot on, I accept it. Thank you.
Feb
3
comment Difficulties in creating strict and robust equivalence between two symbols using the Notation package
In a comment, @Rojo proposed me a neat solution: MakeBoxes[OverBar[x_], TraditionalForm] := OverscriptBox[#, "_", DiacriticalPositioning -> False] &[ MakeBoxes[x, TraditionalForm]] ; Now this plus $PreRead = ReplaceAll[#, "afstarbar" -> OverscriptBox[SuperscriptBox["af", "*"], "_"]] & works great, now my next goal is to let OverscriptBox[SuperscriptBox["af", "*"], "_"]] be a symbol to which I can assign values like to afstarbar, which I think I just managed to do using Symbolize from the ``Notation``` package: Symbolize[ParsedBoxWrapper["afstarbar"]]. I'm testing it more right now :P
Feb
3
comment Difficulties in creating strict and robust equivalence between two symbols using the Notation package
Some feedback: $PreRead = ReplaceAll[#, "afstarbar" -> OverBar[SuperStar["af"]]] & is accepted but then afstarbar gives Syntax::sntxi: Incomplete expression; more input is needed ., so I need to use $PreRead = ReplaceAll[#, "afstarbar" -> OverscriptBox[SuperscriptBox["af", "*"], "_"]] & where the _ is too low, or the same with [HorizontalLine], that makes a too thick bar.
Feb
2
comment Difficulties in creating strict and robust equivalence between two symbols using the Notation package
Hotness! Thanks, I'll give PreRead a try ASAP.
Feb
1
comment How to improve the typesetting of mathematical contents
@R.M Good idea, I'll do that
Feb
1
comment How to improve the typesetting of mathematical contents
Yes @R.M, this is good for me. It's a thicker bar than the default OverBar, but I don't mix the default one with my symbols, so no problem. Thanks, I don't think editing your answer is necessary because this OverBar issue is kind of tangentially off-topic. Your call. And thanks again @Rojo, yours works great for the default OverBar :)
Jan
31
accepted How to improve the typesetting of mathematical contents
Jan
31
comment How to improve the typesetting of mathematical contents
Thanks @RM. I accept yours because I'm more of a command-line type of guy and I like to understand the internals like $Post
Jan
31
comment How to improve the typesetting of mathematical contents
It is :) -- All these answers are good, my question about the MakeBoxes thing is actually off-topic and I should ask it separately.