Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Place options 'All' and 'None' in correct section #770

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Feb 1, 2023

Conversation

rocky
Copy link
Member

@rocky rocky commented Feb 1, 2023

And go over docs and summary text for these. Add examples.

And go over docs and summary text for these. Add examples.
Copy link
Contributor

@mmatera mmatera left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM

@rocky
Copy link
Member Author

rocky commented Feb 1, 2023

@mmatera I am not seeing some of the remaining functions LevelQ and NotListQ listed on the Wolfram site. Do they still work? (Server I use to check this has been unavailable).

@rocky rocky merged commit b91f181 into master Feb 1, 2023
@rocky rocky deleted the move-option-values-out-of-list-misc branch February 1, 2023 13:16
@mmatera
Copy link
Contributor

mmatera commented Feb 1, 2023

@mmatera I am not seeing some of the remaining functions LevelQ and NotListQ listed on the Wolfram site. Do they still work? (Server I use to check this has been unavailable).

nop, these symbols seem to be removed from WMA

@rocky
Copy link
Member Author

rocky commented Feb 1, 2023

If we know when they were removed I will create a Pymathics module for compatibility with XXX, and move this out of core and into this..

@mmatera
Copy link
Contributor

mmatera commented Feb 1, 2023

If we know when they were removed I will create a Pymathics module for compatibility with XXX, and move this out of core and into this..

I never have used that symbol. Legacy versions of the WMA documentation are online. For example,

https://reference.wolfram.com/legacy/v4

has the documentation of version 4. However, I could not find a reference to these symbols.

@mmatera
Copy link
Contributor

mmatera commented Feb 1, 2023

On the other hand, we use LevelQ for defining rules in the module mathics.builtin.functional.apply_fns_to_lists

@rocky
Copy link
Member Author

rocky commented Feb 1, 2023

This is weird. Something similar happens for 'NotListQ' - it is used only in signature testing.

And it is used a lot in SymJa rules in signatures as well which leads me to believe this is a part of Mathematica, just one not documented.

We have the option of keeping this but removing it from user-printed documentation.

Your thoughts?

@rocky
Copy link
Member Author

rocky commented Feb 1, 2023

Or we could admit that it exists for use in function signature applicability and ask people not to use. I don't know.

But personally, I don't like the idea of saying nothing and not informing what's up.

@mmatera
Copy link
Contributor

mmatera commented Feb 1, 2023

I think we should keep it and document it, but maybe move the symbols to another section.

@mmatera
Copy link
Contributor

mmatera commented Feb 1, 2023

A good place for these symbols would be mathics.builtin.testing_expressions.list_oriented. Also probably we should remove the (unexisting) link to Wolfram Reference.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants