Hmm, this is surprising, how can you tell the difference between anonymous and named functions?
g=x->x^2 foo(x,y)=1 typeof(g)==typeof(foo) #true > On 29 Mar 2015, at 7:50 am, Sheehan Olver <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Great, thanks! It looks like applicable doesn’t work on anonymous > functions, which seems like a bug. I guess I’ll file a ticket. > > > >> On 29 Mar 2015, at 7:47 am, Miles Lubin <[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> >> Take a look at applicable(). >> >> On Saturday, March 28, 2015 at 4:30:09 PM UTC-4, Sheehan Olver wrote: >> It currently works like this, which does work with f(x)=x, f(x,y) = x+y: >> >> try >> f(0) >> catch >> try >> f(0,0) >> catch >> f((0,0)) >> end >> end >> >> This code is meant for REPL usage primarily, and so the convenience of >> typing just Fun(f) is worth having such “questionable” code. >> >> >> > On 29 Mar 2015, at 6:29 am, Mauro <[email protected] <javascript:>> >> > wrote: >> > >> >> In ApproxFun, a user supplied function is approximated. the >> >> approximation depends on whether the function is univariate or >> >> bivariate >> > >> > How does it work, if the user defines several methods? >> > >> > f(x) = x >> > f(x,y) = x+y >> > >> >>> The method_exists function would probably be a slightly cleaner way >> >>> to do this. >> > >> > method_exists should be good for generic functions but it does not work >> > with anonymous functions. I think this gives you the number of >> > arguments: >> > >> > length(Base.uncompressed_ast(( (x,y,z)->1 ).code.def).args[1]) >> > >> > something similar should let you figure out whether a one-argument >> > signature is a tuple. Not sure though this is the preferred approach. >> >
