Acordding to the documentation of maxima, with_stdout is a function that evaluates some expressions and writes the output according to this expressions to a file f. I tried to use this function with a simple example:
with_stdout ("data.txt", for x:0 thru 10 do print (x, x^2, x^3))$
But the output look like this:
<mth><n>0</n><st> </st><n>0</n><st> </st><n>0</n><st> </st></mth><mth><n>1</n><st> </st><n>1</n><st> </st><n>1</n><st> </st></mth><mth><n>2</n><st> </st><n>4</n><st> </st><n>8</n><st> </st></mth><mth><n>3</n><st> </st><n>9</n><st> </st><n>27</n><st> </st></mth><mth><n>4</n><st> </st><n>16</n><st> </st><n>64</n><st> </st></mth><mth><n>5</n><st> </st><n>25</n><st> </st><n>125</n><st> </st></mth><mth><n>6</n><st> </st><n>36</n><st> </st><n>216</n><st> </st></mth><mth><n>7</n><st> </st><n>49</n><st> </st><n>343</n><st> </st></mth><mth><n>8</n><st> </st><n>64</n><st> </st><n>512</n><st> </st></mth><mth><n>9</n><st> </st><n>81</n><st> </st><n>729</n><st> </st></mth><mth><n>10</n><st> </st><n>100</n><st> </st><n>1000</n><st> </st></mth>
instead of writting a table with three columns as it is supposed to do.
I don't even understand the first output. What I am missunderstanding or missing here?
--
It seems there is a bug triggered by Wxmaxima, I don't know if it is on maxima aswell.
Regards.
Apparently wxMaxima overrides the default print function to generate XML tags (stuff like <foo> ... </foo>) which wxMaxima uses to indicate how stuff is displayed. I don't know if it's possible to directly call the default print function in wxMaxima; maybe, maybe not.
I can see a few options. (1) Call grind instead, which outputs the so-called 1-dimensional output. That's probably more suitable for file output anyway.
(2) Call printf, e.g. printf(true, "~a, ~a, ~a~%", x, x^2, x^3). printf recognizes many output options, as described by ? printf. It's possible printf calls are also intercepted by wxMaxima, I haven't tried it.
(3) Use the plain text, console Maxima interface, then print is sure to be the default.
Related
tex1() seems to return all strings as follow:
tex1(hello);
{\it hello}
tex1("hello");
\mbox{ hello }
What variable must one use to change this handling via texput? e.g. if I would just like it to print strings literally? I'm using other Maxima commands (like printf and concat to produce strings that are then passed to tex1, and occasionally the default handling is causing issues.
I tried texput(""", ...) and texput("''", ...); the first wasn't accepted, the 2nd was, but did not change the output. I really have no clue for the non-quoted strings.
Let's be careful to distinguish symbols from strings. When you enter tex1(hello) then hello is a symbol, and when you enter tex1("hello") then "hello" is a string. Symbols are essentially names for items in a lookup table, which can store additional info (symbol properties) for each. Strings on the other hand are just (from Maxima's point of view) just a sequence of characters.
Anyway changing the output for all symbols or all strings is unfortunately not possible via texput. But with a one-line Lisp function, one can accomplish it. Try this: for symbols,
:lisp (defun tex-stripdollar (sym) (maybe-invert-string-case (symbol-name (stripdollar sym))))
and for strings,
:lisp (defun tex-string (str) str)
These are going to change some existing outputs, so you'll want to try it and see if it works for you.
I'm trying to automate some output using printf but I'm struggling to find a way to pass to it the list of arguments expr_1, ..., expr_n in
printf (dest, string, expr_1, ..., expr_n)
I thought of using something like Javascript's spread operator but I'm not even sure I should need it.
For instace, say I have a list of strings to be output
a:["foo","bar","foobar"];
a string of appropriate format descriptors, say
s: "~a ~a ~a ~%";
and an output stream, say os. How can I invoke printf using these things in such a way that the result will be the same as writing
printf(os,s,a[1],a[2],a[3]);
Then I could generalize it to output lists of variable size.
Any suggestions?
Thanks.
EDIT:
I just learned about apply and, using the conditions I posed in my OP, the following seems to work wonderfully:
apply(printf,append([os,s],a));
Maxima printf implements most or maybe all of the formatting operators from Common Lisp FORMAT, which are quite extensive; see: http://www.lispworks.com/documentation/HyperSpec/Body/22_c.htm See also ? printf in Maxima to get an abbreviated list of formatting operators.
In particular for a list you can do something like:
printf (os, "my list: ~{~a~^, ~}~%", a);
to get the elements of a separated by ,. Here "~{...~}" tells printf to expect a list, and ~a is how to format each element, ~^ means omit the inter-element stuff after the last element, and , means put that between elements. Of course , could be anything.
There are many variations on that; if that's not what you're looking for, maybe I can help you find it.
Suppose in a (wx)Maxima session I have the following
f:sin(x);
df:diff(f,x);
Now I want to have it output a text file containing something like, for example
If $f(x)=\sin(x)$, then $f^\prime(x)=\cos(x)$.
I found the tex and tex1 functions but I think I need some additional string processing to be able to do what I want.
Any help appreciated.
EDIT: Further clarifications.
Auto Multiple Choice is a software that helps you create and manage questionaires. To declare questions one may use LaTeX syntax. From AMC's documentation, a question looks like this:
\element{geographie}{
\begin{question}{Cameroon}
Which is the capital city of Cameroon?
\begin{choices}
\correctchoice{Yaoundé}
\wrongchoice{Douala}
\wrongchoice{Abou-Dabi}
\end{choices}
\end{question}
}
As can be seen, it is just LaTeX. Now, with a little modification, I can turn this example into a math question
\element{derivatives}{
\begin{question}{trig_fun_diff_1}
If $f(x)=\sin(x)$ then $f^\prime(0)$ is
\begin{choices}
\correctchoice{$1$}
\wrongchoice{$-1$}
\wrongchoice{$0$}
\end{choices}
\end{question}
}
This is the sort of output I want. I'll have, say, a list of functions then execute a loop calculating their derivatives and so on.
OK, in response to your updated question. My advice is to work with questions and answers as expressions -- build up your list of questions first, and then when you have the list in the structure that you want, then output the TeX file as the last step. It is generally much clearer and simpler to work with expressions than with strings.
E.g. Here is a simplistic approach. I'll use defstruct to define a structure so that I can refer to its parts by name.
defstruct (question (name, datum, item, correct, incorrect));
myq1 : new (question);
myq1#name : "trig_fun_diff_1";
myq1#datum : f(x) = sin(x);
myq1#item : 'at ('diff (f(x), x), x = 0);
myq1#correct : 1;
myq1#incorrect : [0, -1];
You can also write
myq1 : question ("trig_fun_diff_1", f(x) = sin(x),
'at ('diff (f(x), x), x = 0), 1, [0, -1]);
I don't know which form is more convenient for you.
Then you can make an output function similar to this:
tex_question (q, output_stream) :=
(printf (output_stream, "\\begin{question}{~a}~%", q#name),
printf (output_stream, "If $~a$, then $~a$ is:~%", tex1 (q#datum), tex1 (q#item)),
printf (output_stream, "\\begin{choices}~%"),
/* make a list comprising correct and incorrect here */
/* shuffle the list (see random_permutation) */
/* output each correct or incorrect here */
printf (output_stream, "\\end{choices}~%"),
printf (output_stream, "\\end{question}~%));
where output_stream is an output stream as returned by openw (which see).
It may take a little bit of trying different stuff to get derivatives to be output in just the format you want. My advice is to put the logic for that into the output function.
A side effect of working with expressions is that it is straightforward to output some representations other than TeX (e.g. plain text, XML, HTML). That might or might not become important for your project.
Well, tex is the TeX output function. It can be customized to some extent via texput (which see).
As to post-processing via string manipulation, I don't recommend it. However, if you want to go down that road, there are regex functions which you can access via load(sregex). Unfortunately it's not yet documented; see the comment header of sregex.lisp (somewhere in your Maxima installation) for examples.
I need to remove all \text generated by TeXForm in Mathematica.
What I am doing now is this:
MyTeXForm[a_]:=StringReplace[ToString[TeXForm[a]], "\\text" -> ""]
But the result keeps the braces, for example:
for a=fx,
the result of TeXForm[a] is \text{fx}
the result of MyTeXForm[a] is {fx}
But what I would like is it to be just fx
You should be able to use string patterns. Based on http://reference.wolfram.com/mathematica/tutorial/StringPatterns.html, something like the following should work:
MyTeXForm[a_]:=StringReplace[ToString[TeXForm[a]], "\\text{"~~s___~~"}"->s]
I don't have Mathematica handy right now, but this should say 'Match "\text{" followed by zero or more characters that are stored in the variable s, followed by "}", then replace all of that with whatever is stored in s.'
UPDATE:
The above works in the simplest case of there being a single "\text{...}" element, but the pattern s___ is greedy, so on input a+bb+xx+y, which Mathematica's TeXForm renders as "a+\text{bb}+\text{xx}+y", it matches everything between the first "\text{" and last "}" --- so, "bb}+\text{xx" --- leading to the output
In[1]:= MyTeXForm[a+bb+xx+y]
Out[1]= a+bb}+\text{xx+y
A fix for this is to wrap the pattern with Shortest[], leading to a second definition
In[2]:= MyTeXForm2[a_] := StringReplace[
ToString[TeXForm[a]],
Shortest["\\text{" ~~ s___ ~~ "}"] -> s
]
which yields the output
In[3]:= MyTeXForm2[a+bb+xx+y]
Out[3]= a+bb+xx+y
as desired.
Unfortunately this still won't work when the text itself contains a closing brace. For example, the input f["a}b","c}d"] (for some reason...) would give
In[4]:= MyTeXForm2[f["a}b","c}d"]]
Out[4]= f(a$\$b},c$\$d})
instead of "f(a$\}$b,c$\}$d)", which would be the proper processing of the TeXForm output "f(\text{a$\}$b},\text{c$\}$d})".
This is what I did (works fine for me):
MyTeXForm[a_] := ToString[ToExpression[StringReplace[ToString[TeXForm[a]], "\\text" -> ""]][[1]]]
This is a really late reply, but I just came up against the same issue and discovered a simple solution. Put a space between the variables in the Mathematica expression that you wish to convert using TexForm.
For the original poster's example, the following code works great:
a=f x
TeXForm[a]
The output is as desired: f x
Since LaTeX will ignore that space in math mode, things will format correctly.
(As an aside, I was having the same issue with subscripted expressions that have two side-by-side variables in the subscript. Inserting a space between them solved the issue.)
I am relatively new to maxima. I want to know how to write an array into a text file using maxima.
I know it's late in the game for the original post, but I'll leave this here in case someone finds it in a search.
Let A be a Lisp array, Maxima array, matrix, list, or nested list. Then:
write_data (A, "some_file.data");
Let S be an ouput stream (created by openw or opena). Then:
write_data (A, S);
Entering ?? numericalio at the input prompt, or ?? write_ or ?? read_, will show some info about this function and related ones.
I've never used maxima (or even heard of it), but a little Google searching out of curiousity turned up this: http://arachnoid.com/maxima/files_functions.html
From what I can gather, you should be able to do something like this:
stringout("my_new_file.txt",values);
It says the second parameter to the stringout function can be one or more of these:
input: all user entries since the beginning of the session.
values: all user variable and array assignments.
functions: all user-defined functions (including functions defined within any loaded packages).
all: all of the above. Such a list is normally useful only for editing and extraction of useful sections.
So by passing values it should save your array assignments to file.
A bit more necroposting, as google leads here, but I haven't found it useful enough. I've needed to export it as following:
-0.8000,-0.8000,-0.2422,-0.242
-0.7942,-0.7942,-0.2387,-0.239
-0.7776,-0.7776,-0.2285,-0.228
-0.7514,-0.7514,-0.2124,-0.212
-0.7168,-0.7168,-0.1912,-0.191
-0.6750,-0.6750,-0.1655,-0.166
-0.6272,-0.6272,-0.1362,-0.136
-0.5746,-0.5746,-0.1039,-0.104
So I've found how to do this with printf:
with_stdout(filename, for i:1 thru length(z_points) do
printf (true,"~,4f,~,4f,~,4f,~,3f~%",bot_points[i],bot_points[i],top_points[i],top_points[i]));
A bit cleaner variation on the #ProdoElmit's answer:
list : [1,2,3,4,5]$
with_stdout("file.txt", apply(print, list))$
/* 1 2 3 4 5 is then what appears in file.txt */
Here the trick with apply is needed as you probably don't want to have square brackets in your output, as is produced by print(list).
For a matrix to be printed out, I would have done the following:
m : matrix([1,2],[3,4])$
with_stdout("file.txt", for row in args(m) do apply(print, row))$
/* 1 2
3 4
is what you then have in file.txt */
Note that in my solution the values are separated with spaces and the format of your values is fixed to that provided by print. Another caveat is that there is a limit on the number of function parameters: for example, for me (GCL 2.6.12) my method does not work if length(list) > 64.