Reputation
1,020
Next privilege 2,000 Rep.
Edit questions and answers
Badges
4 15
Newest
 Yearling
Impact
~11k people reached

  • 0 posts edited
  • 0 helpful flags
  • 3 votes cast
Jul
28
awarded  Yearling
Jul
1
comment Executing Mathematica code via Notepad++
@Yorgos If you're satisfied with it, please accept the answer. (I'm not a karma chaser, I merely want questions to have answers.)
Jun
29
awarded  Enlightened
Jun
29
awarded  Nice Answer
Jun
28
revised How to Apply Functions to Lists with Many Curly Brackets?
added 11 characters in body
Jun
28
answered How to Apply Functions to Lists with Many Curly Brackets?
Jun
20
awarded  Organizer
Jun
20
revised Executing Mathematica code via Notepad++
changed tags to 'script'; all former tags (development, notebooks, code-generation) were not relevant
Jun
20
suggested approved edit on Executing Mathematica code via Notepad++
Jun
20
revised Executing Mathematica code via Notepad++
deleted 2 characters in body
Jun
20
revised Executing Mathematica code via Notepad++
deleted 2 characters in body
Jun
20
revised Executing Mathematica code via Notepad++
added 2 characters in body
Jun
20
revised Executing Mathematica code via Notepad++
added 44 characters in body
Jun
20
answered Executing Mathematica code via Notepad++
Jun
20
comment Executing Mathematica code via Notepad++
…Thus, I suggest you describe in little more detail how you imagine this execution would look to you, as end-user.
Jun
20
comment Executing Mathematica code via Notepad++
I guess the main reason this is not described anywhere is, it's not clear what the procedure should look like in general case. Mathematica expressions are meant to be evaluated “in place”, that is, in a REPL. Most good Mathematica code does not have explicit side effects. Which means, if you have a list of expressions in your text file, it's not really clear what to do with them. Make a list of unevaluated expresions, thread Evaluate over it and export/dump list of results to a fresh file? Won't that become a mess in most cases?..
Jun
2
answered why does replacement rule not work
May
31
revised Levelspec range with negative levelspec
deleted 283 characters in body
May
31
accepted Levelspec range with negative levelspec
May
31
comment Levelspec range with negative levelspec
I see. In {-m, n} case, I counted the positive levelspec from the root of the (found) m-depth subexpressions, while I should have counted from the top of the original expression (or, equivalently, to put the “positive” restriction first, despite it being written second). To wrap it up: 1. {m, -n}: on levels ≥ m, all subexpressions of depth ≥ n 2. {-m, n}: on levels ≤ n, all subexpressions of depth ≤ m 3. {-m, -n}: all subexpressions with depth between n and m. NB: 1 and 2 hold for {0, -n} and {-m, 0}, respectively.