Sign Up

Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.

Have an account? Sign In

Have an account? Sign In Now

Sign In

Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.

Sign Up Here

Forgot Password?

Don't have account, Sign Up Here

Forgot Password

Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.

Have an account? Sign In Now

You must login to ask a question.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.

Sign InSign Up

The Archive Base

The Archive Base Logo The Archive Base Logo

The Archive Base Navigation

  • Home
  • SEARCH
  • About Us
  • Blog
  • Contact Us
Search
Ask A Question

Mobile menu

Close
Ask a Question
  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Feed
  • User Profile
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Buy Points
  • Users
  • Help
  • Buy Theme
  • SEARCH
Home/ Questions/Q 4051790
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Editorial Team
Asked: May 20, 20262026-05-20T14:14:19+00:00 2026-05-20T14:14:19+00:00

I would like to set up the following custom notation in Mathematica 7. This

  • 0

I would like to set up the following custom notation in Mathematica 7.

This notation is not particularly useful in itself, so please do not suggest existing alternatives, or point out that this only saves a few keystrokes.

I want to know if and how it may be done.


At present, one may enter

f = #2 + #^2 / #3 & @@ # & ;

f[ {a, b, c} ]

Out[]= b + a^2 / c

Where the inner function #^2 / #3 + #2 & is Apply‘d to the first argument.


I would like to implement the syntax

f = #2 + #^2 / #3 @@& ;

and have it behave exactly the same. That is, @@& to represent a Function that is automatically applied to its first argument.

It will need to have the same binding as the & symbol.


It is preferable that this is done with the Notations package, to whatever extent that is possible, rather than manual MakeBoxes, for the sake of ease in setting up similar notations, even though the use of Notations is more difficult to communicate via text.

  • 1 1 Answer
  • 0 Views
  • 0 Followers
  • 0
Share
  • Facebook
  • Report

Leave an answer
Cancel reply

You must login to add an answer.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

1 Answer

  • Voted
  • Oldest
  • Recent
  • Random
  1. Editorial Team
    Editorial Team
    2026-05-20T14:14:20+00:00Added an answer on May 20, 2026 at 2:14 pm

    You can’t do this with an operator syntax of your own invention (like @@&). Mathematica just doesn’t have the capability to modify the language grammar at runtime like that.

    You can get at least partway there with the Notation package, but you have to use a symbol that has no meaning in Mathematica, and possibly most of the way there with one of the operators without built-in meanings, but most (if any) of them don’t bind as postfix operators.

    Here, for example, I’ll use the Notations package to define the \[Wolf] character as an admittedly pseudo-postfix operator in place of @@&:

    In[1]:= Needs["Notation`"]
    
    In[2]:= Notation[x_ \[Wolf] \[DoubleLongLeftRightArrow] (x_ @@ # &)]
    
    In[3]:=  f=#2+#^2/#3& \[Wolf]
    Out[3]= (#2+#1^2/#3&) \[Wolf]
    
    In[4]:= f[{a,b,c}]
    Out[4]= b+a^2/c
    

    I’ll include a screenshot too since this involves notation:

    example operator hackery

    Where this approach may fail is in the fact that you can’t set an operator precedence for an arbitrary symbol like \[Wolf]. You can instead use one of the meaningless operators I linked to above, but those also have a fixed precedence that can’t be changed.

    If you found PrecedenceForm in the documentation you might get a brief false hope, but as the docs say, it only effects printing and not evaluation.

    HTH!

    • 0
    • Reply
    • Share
      Share
      • Share on Facebook
      • Share on Twitter
      • Share on LinkedIn
      • Share on WhatsApp
      • Report

Sidebar

Related Questions

No related questions found

Explore

  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Users
  • Help
  • SEARCH

Footer

© 2021 The Archive Base. All Rights Reserved
With Love by The Archive Base

Insert/edit link

Enter the destination URL

Or link to existing content

    No search term specified. Showing recent items. Search or use up and down arrow keys to select an item.