Efficient way to join elements under a conditional











up vote
2
down vote

favorite












I am solving a certain challenge given by my friend.



I want to print the first day of the year if it is not a leap year, while I want both first and second days if it is a leap year.



I want to know if there is an efficient way to rewrite this piece of code:



If[Mod[year,4]==0,DayName/@{{year,1,1},{year,1,2}},{DayName[{year,1,1}]}]





list-manipulation







share|improve this question






















  • As an aside: leap years are not years which are multiples of 4, the definition is slightly more complex
    – Lonidard
    5 hours ago















up vote
2
down vote

favorite












I am solving a certain challenge given by my friend.



I want to print the first day of the year if it is not a leap year, while I want both first and second days if it is a leap year.



I want to know if there is an efficient way to rewrite this piece of code:



If[Mod[year,4]==0,DayName/@{{year,1,1},{year,1,2}},{DayName[{year,1,1}]}]





list-manipulation







share|improve this question






















  • As an aside: leap years are not years which are multiples of 4, the definition is slightly more complex
    – Lonidard
    5 hours ago













up vote
2
down vote

favorite









up vote
2
down vote

favorite











I am solving a certain challenge given by my friend.



I want to print the first day of the year if it is not a leap year, while I want both first and second days if it is a leap year.



I want to know if there is an efficient way to rewrite this piece of code:



If[Mod[year,4]==0,DayName/@{{year,1,1},{year,1,2}},{DayName[{year,1,1}]}]





list-manipulation







share|improve this question













I am solving a certain challenge given by my friend.



I want to print the first day of the year if it is not a leap year, while I want both first and second days if it is a leap year.



I want to know if there is an efficient way to rewrite this piece of code:



If[Mod[year,4]==0,DayName/@{{year,1,1},{year,1,2}},{DayName[{year,1,1}]}]





list-manipulation




list-manipulation






share|improve this question













share|improve this question











share|improve this question




share|improve this question










asked 7 hours ago









JustCurious

1264




1264












  • As an aside: leap years are not years which are multiples of 4, the definition is slightly more complex
    – Lonidard
    5 hours ago


















  • As an aside: leap years are not years which are multiples of 4, the definition is slightly more complex
    – Lonidard
    5 hours ago
















As an aside: leap years are not years which are multiples of 4, the definition is slightly more complex
– Lonidard
5 hours ago




As an aside: leap years are not years which are multiples of 4, the definition is slightly more complex
– Lonidard
5 hours ago










2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes

















up vote
3
down vote













Here is an alternate solution not using If:



Table[ DayName[ {year, 1, x} ], {x, 1 + Boole[ LeapYearQ[{year} ]]} ]





share|improve this answer




























    up vote
    2
    down vote













    LeapYearQ should be more reliable, in particular since special rules apply if the year is divisible by 100 or 400.



    f = year [Function] If[
    
   LeapYearQ[{year, 1, 1}],
    
   DayName /@ {{year, 1, 1}, {year, 1, 2}},
    
   {DayName[{year, 1, 1}]}
    
   ]





    share|improve this answer





















    • Thanks for that tip. But is there still a better way to write the rest of the code? I mean specifically for DayName part.
      – JustCurious
      7 hours ago










    • Hm. What does "better" mean? Are you concerned about efficiency? Why? How many years do you want to test this way?
      – Henrik Schumacher
      7 hours ago










    • I'm concerned about efficiency since it's a challenge. Nothing much.
      – JustCurious
      7 hours ago











    Your Answer





    StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
    return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
    StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
    StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
    });
    });
    }, "mathjax-editing");

    StackExchange.ready(function() {
    var channelOptions = {
    tags: "".split(" "),
    id: "387"
    };
    initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

    StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
    // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
    if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
    StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
    createEditor();
    });
    }
    else {
    createEditor();
    }
    });

    function createEditor() {
    StackExchange.prepareEditor({
    heartbeatType: 'answer',
    convertImagesToLinks: false,
    noModals: true,
    showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
    reputationToPostImages: null,
    bindNavPrevention: true,
    postfix: "",
    imageUploader: {
    brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
    contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
    allowUrls: true
    },
    onDemand: true,
    discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
    ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
    });


    }
    });














    draft saved

    draft discarded


















    StackExchange.ready(
    function () {
    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmathematica.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f187250%2fefficient-way-to-join-elements-under-a-conditional%23new-answer', 'question_page');
    }
    );

    Post as a guest















    Required, but never shown

























    2 Answers
    2






    active

    oldest

    votes








    2 Answers
    2






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes








    up vote
    3
    down vote













    Here is an alternate solution not using If:



    Table[ DayName[ {year, 1, x} ], {x, 1 + Boole[ LeapYearQ[{year} ]]} ]





    share|improve this answer

























      up vote
      3
      down vote













      Here is an alternate solution not using If:



      Table[ DayName[ {year, 1, x} ], {x, 1 + Boole[ LeapYearQ[{year} ]]} ]





      share|improve this answer























        up vote
        3
        down vote










        up vote
        3
        down vote









        Here is an alternate solution not using If:



        Table[ DayName[ {year, 1, x} ], {x, 1 + Boole[ LeapYearQ[{year} ]]} ]





        share|improve this answer












        Here is an alternate solution not using If:



        Table[ DayName[ {year, 1, x} ], {x, 1 + Boole[ LeapYearQ[{year} ]]} ]






        share|improve this answer












        share|improve this answer



        share|improve this answer










        answered 6 hours ago









        sakra

        2,4281328




        2,4281328






















            up vote
            2
            down vote













            LeapYearQ should be more reliable, in particular since special rules apply if the year is divisible by 100 or 400.



            f = year [Function] If[
            
   LeapYearQ[{year, 1, 1}],
            
   DayName /@ {{year, 1, 1}, {year, 1, 2}},
            
   {DayName[{year, 1, 1}]}
            
   ]





            share|improve this answer





















            • Thanks for that tip. But is there still a better way to write the rest of the code? I mean specifically for DayName part.
              – JustCurious
              7 hours ago










            • Hm. What does "better" mean? Are you concerned about efficiency? Why? How many years do you want to test this way?
              – Henrik Schumacher
              7 hours ago










            • I'm concerned about efficiency since it's a challenge. Nothing much.
              – JustCurious
              7 hours ago















            up vote
            2
            down vote













            LeapYearQ should be more reliable, in particular since special rules apply if the year is divisible by 100 or 400.



            f = year [Function] If[
            
   LeapYearQ[{year, 1, 1}],
            
   DayName /@ {{year, 1, 1}, {year, 1, 2}},
            
   {DayName[{year, 1, 1}]}
            
   ]





            share|improve this answer





















            • Thanks for that tip. But is there still a better way to write the rest of the code? I mean specifically for DayName part.
              – JustCurious
              7 hours ago










            • Hm. What does "better" mean? Are you concerned about efficiency? Why? How many years do you want to test this way?
              – Henrik Schumacher
              7 hours ago










            • I'm concerned about efficiency since it's a challenge. Nothing much.
              – JustCurious
              7 hours ago













            up vote
            2
            down vote










            up vote
            2
            down vote









            LeapYearQ should be more reliable, in particular since special rules apply if the year is divisible by 100 or 400.



            f = year [Function] If[
            
   LeapYearQ[{year, 1, 1}],
            
   DayName /@ {{year, 1, 1}, {year, 1, 2}},
            
   {DayName[{year, 1, 1}]}
            
   ]





            share|improve this answer












            LeapYearQ should be more reliable, in particular since special rules apply if the year is divisible by 100 or 400.



            f = year [Function] If[
            
   LeapYearQ[{year, 1, 1}],
            
   DayName /@ {{year, 1, 1}, {year, 1, 2}},
            
   {DayName[{year, 1, 1}]}
            
   ]






            share|improve this answer












            share|improve this answer



            share|improve this answer










            answered 7 hours ago









            Henrik Schumacher

            46.4k466133




            46.4k466133












            • Thanks for that tip. But is there still a better way to write the rest of the code? I mean specifically for DayName part.
              – JustCurious
              7 hours ago










            • Hm. What does "better" mean? Are you concerned about efficiency? Why? How many years do you want to test this way?
              – Henrik Schumacher
              7 hours ago










            • I'm concerned about efficiency since it's a challenge. Nothing much.
              – JustCurious
              7 hours ago


















            • Thanks for that tip. But is there still a better way to write the rest of the code? I mean specifically for DayName part.
              – JustCurious
              7 hours ago










            • Hm. What does "better" mean? Are you concerned about efficiency? Why? How many years do you want to test this way?
              – Henrik Schumacher
              7 hours ago










            • I'm concerned about efficiency since it's a challenge. Nothing much.
              – JustCurious
              7 hours ago
















            Thanks for that tip. But is there still a better way to write the rest of the code? I mean specifically for DayName part.
            – JustCurious
            7 hours ago




            Thanks for that tip. But is there still a better way to write the rest of the code? I mean specifically for DayName part.
            – JustCurious
            7 hours ago












            Hm. What does "better" mean? Are you concerned about efficiency? Why? How many years do you want to test this way?
            – Henrik Schumacher
            7 hours ago




            Hm. What does "better" mean? Are you concerned about efficiency? Why? How many years do you want to test this way?
            – Henrik Schumacher
            7 hours ago












            I'm concerned about efficiency since it's a challenge. Nothing much.
            – JustCurious
            7 hours ago




            I'm concerned about efficiency since it's a challenge. Nothing much.
            – JustCurious
            7 hours ago


















            draft saved

            draft discarded




















































            Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematica Stack Exchange!


            • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

            But avoid …



            • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

            • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


            Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


            To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.





            Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.


            Please pay close attention to the following guidance:


            • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

            But avoid …



            • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

            • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


            To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




            draft saved


            draft discarded














            StackExchange.ready(
            function () {
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmathematica.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f187250%2fefficient-way-to-join-elements-under-a-conditional%23new-answer', 'question_page');
            }
            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown





















































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown

































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown







            -

            Popular posts from this blog

            What visual should I use to simply compare current year value vs last year in Power BI desktop

            Image
            0 I have column SubToBind that shows current year ratio and column PY SubToBind which shows previous year ratio. How can I simply create a card that would be displaying them both in a nice way? Something like that: I cannot achieve that with regular card, I also tried Card with States by OKViz but also unable to see both values. In KPI visual - I dont like the word "Goal", it will confuse end users. Are there any cards or other visuals that would do the job? Thanks powerbi dax powerbi-embedded share | improve this question edited Jun 11 '18 at 20:11 Oleg
            Read more

            Alexandru Averescu

            Image
            Alexandre Averescu Alexandru Averescu Naissance 3 avril 1859 Babele, Ismail  (ro) près de Izmaïl (principauté de Moldavie) Décès 2 octobre 1938 (à 79 ans) [ 1 ] Bucarest Origine   Roumanie Arme cavalerie Grade Maréchal Années de service 1901-1917 Commandement chef d'état-major général 2 e  armée 3 e  armée Groupe d'armée sud armée du Danube Conflits Guerre russo-turque de 1877-1878 Deuxième guerre balkanique Première Guerre mondiale Faits d'armes Bataille de Turtucaia/Tutrakan Bataille de Mărăști Distinctions Autres fonctions 3 fois président du Conseil des ministres ministre des Affaires étrangères ministre sans portefeuille conseiller de la Couronne modifier   Alexandre Averescu (en roumain : Alexandru Averescu .mw-parser-output .prononciation>a{background:url("//upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/8a/Loudspeaker.svg/11px-Loudspeaker.svg.png")center
            Read more

            Trompette piccolo

            Image
            Ne doit pas être confondu avec trompette de poche. Trompette piccolo en si bémol, avec des branches d'embouchure différentes pour le si bémol (la plus courte) ou la (la plus longue) Trompette piccolo La trompette piccolo est la plus petite de la famille des trompettes. Elle joue une octave plus haut que la trompette standard en si bémol. La plupart des trompettes piccolo sont conçues pour jouer dans les deux tonalités de si bémol ou la, en utilisant une branche d'embouchure différente pour chaque tonalité. Le tube de la trompette piccolo en si bémol a une longueur moitié de celle de la trompette normale en si bémol. Des trompettes piccolo en sol, fa, ut sont également fabriquées, mais elles sont rares. La trompette soprano en ré, aussi connu comme la « trompette Bach », a été inventée vers 1890 par le facteur belge Victor-Charles Mahillon pour jouer les parties hautes de la trompette dans la musique de Bach et Haendel. La trompette piccolo moderne permet aux
            Read more