Say we have something like this:
;list L of n procedure definitions, where a procedure definition is a list in form:
;<name> <body>
;for example: ((n1 (+ 1 1)) (n2 (- 1 0)) (n3 (* 2 2))), where n = 3, n1 is the name of
;first procedure in list L and (+ 1 1) is its body.
Now I want n local bindings created. Based on the example above, something like this:
(define foo
(let* ((n1 (lambda () (+ 1 1)
(n2 (lambda () (- 1 0)
(n3 (lambda () (* 2 2))
(n1) ;newly defined procedure calls
(n2)
))
It's hardcoded in here, is there any way to create n local bindings without hardcoding them? Like reading the list of n procedures until it's empty and for each procedure definition inside, create a local bind of it inside let*?
Thank you in advance.
Here is an example of a macro.
#lang racket
(require (for-syntax syntax/parse))
(define-syntax (define-locals stx)
(syntax-parse stx
[(_define-locals ([name expr] ...) body ...)
#'(let ([name (lambda () expr)] ...) body ...)]))
(define-locals ((n1 (+ 1 1)) (n2 (- 1 0)) (n3 (* 2 2)))
(list (n1)
(n2)
(n3)))
The result is:
'(2 1 4)
Related
I'm pretty new to Common Lisp. And I try to build my own operator functions.
In the first function I tried to add one to the given number.
The second function we do a recursive use of the first in the frequency of m.
When I enter totaladd ( 5 3 ) I expect an 8.
What can I do about the undefined funciton k?
(defun add1(n)
(+ n 1)
)
(write (add1 5))
(defun totaladd (k m)
(if (eq m 0)
0
(totaladd(add1(k) (- m 1)))
)
)
(write (totaladd 5 3))
There are three errors in the next line:
(totaladd(add1(k) (- m 1)))
Let's look at it:
(totaladd ; totaladd is a function with two parameters
; you pass only one argument -> first ERROR
(add1 ; add1 is a function with one parameter
; you pass two arguments -> second ERROR
(k) ; K is a variable, but you call it as a function,
; but the function K is undefined -> third ERROR
(- m 1)))
(defun add1 (n) (+ n 1))
(defun totaladd (k m)
(if (= m 0)
k
(add1 (totaladd k (- m 1)))))
There is a extra function for (= ... 0) called zerop which asks whether a number os zero or not. Very frequently used when recursing over numbers as the break condition out of the recursion.
There is also an extra function for (- ... 1) or (+ ... 1) because these are common steps when recursing with numbers: (1- ...) and (1+ ...), respectively.
(Their destructive forms are (incf ...) and (decf ...), but these are not needed for recursion.)
So, using this, your form becomes:
(defun totaladd (k m)
(if (zerop m)
k
(add1 (totaladd k (1- m)))))
I am reading sicp, there's a problem (practice 1.29), I write a scheme function to solve the the question, but it seems that the recursive call of the function get the wrong answer. Really strange to me. The code is following:
(define simpson
(lambda (f a b n)
(let ((h (/ (- b a) n))
(k 0))
(letrec
((sum (lambda (term start next end)
(if (> start end)
0
(+ (term start)
(sum term (next start) next end)))))
(next (lambda (x)
(let ()
(set! k (+ k 1))
(+ x h))))
(term (lambda (x)
(cond
((= k 0) (f a))
((= k n) (f b))
((even? k) (* 2
(f x)))
(else (* 4
(f x)))))))
(sum term a next b)))))
I didn't get the right answer.
For example, if I try to call the simpson function like this:
(simpson (lambda (x) x) 0 1 4)
I expected to get the 6, but it returned 10 to me, I am not sure where the error is.It seems to me that the function "sum" defined inside of Simpson function is not right.
If I rewrite the sum function inside of simpson using the iteration instead of recursive, I get the right answer.
You need to multiply the sum with h/3:
(* 1/3 h (sum term a next b))
I have an assignment in which i need to explain the impact on the memory using two types of delayed computation. The code solves the hanoi problem.
Type 1:
(define count-4 (lambda (n) (count-4-helper n (lambda (x) x)))
(define count-4-helper (lambda (n cont)
(if (= n 1)
(cont 1)
(count-4-helper (- n 1) (lambda(res) (cont (+ 1 (* 2 res))))))))
Type 2:
(define count-5 (lambda (n) (count-5-helper n (lambda () 1)))
(define count-5-helper (lambda (n cont)
(if (= n 1)
(cont)
(count-5-helper (- n 1) (lambda() (+ 1 (* 2 (cont))))))))
The first case is the classic syntax of delayed computation. The second case is the same only it doesn't get any arguments and just returns the initial value.
The question is which one of those function is tail-recursive?(i think both them are). And how different is their memory consumption? The second should be more effective but i can't really explain.
Thanks for your time.
The answer is in these two lambdas:
(lambda (res) (cont (+ 1 (* 2 res))))
(lambda () (+ 1 (* 2 (cont))))
In one of them but not the other, cont is called in tail position with respect to the lambda.
I'm a newbie in LISP. I'm trying to write a function in CLISP to generate the first n numbers of Fibonacci series.
This is what I've done so far.
(defun fibonacci(n)
(cond
((eq n 1) 0)
((eq n 2) 1)
((+ (fibonacci (- n 1)) (fibonacci (- n 2))))))))
The program prints the nth number of Fibonacci series. I'm trying to modify it so that it would print the series, and not just the nth term.
Is it possible to do so in just a single recursive function, using just the basic functions?
Yes:
(defun fibonacci (n &optional (a 0) (b 1) (acc ()))
(if (zerop n)
(nreverse acc)
(fibonacci (1- n) b (+ a b) (cons a acc))))
(fibonacci 5) ; ==> (0 1 1 2 3)
The logic behind it is that you need to know the two previous numbers to generate the next.
a 0 1 1 2 3 5 ...
b 1 1 2 3 5 8 ...
new-b 1 2 3 5 8 13 ...
Instead of returning just one result I accumulate all the a-s until n is zero.
EDIT Without reverse it's a bit more inefficient:
(defun fibonacci (n &optional (a 0) (b 1))
(if (zerop n)
nil
(cons a (fibonacci (1- n) b (+ a b)))))
(fibonacci 5) ; ==> (0 1 1 2 3)
The program prints the nth number of Fibonacci series.
This program doesn't print anything. If you're seeing output, it's probably because you're calling it from the read-eval-print-loop (REPL), which reads a form, evaluates it, and then prints the result. E.g., you might be doing:
CL-USER> (fibonacci 4)
2
If you wrapped that call in something else, though, you'll see that it's not printing anything:
CL-USER> (progn (fibonacci 4) nil)
NIL
As you've got this written, it will be difficult to modify it to print each fibonacci number just once, since you do a lot of redundant computation. For instance, the call to
(fibonacci (- n 1))
will compute (fibonacci (- n 1)), but so will the direct call to
(fibonacci (- n 2))
That means you probably don't want each call to fibonacci to print the whole sequence. If you do, though, note that (print x) returns the value of x, so you can simply do:
(defun fibonacci(n)
(cond
((eq n 1) 0)
((eq n 2) 1)
((print (+ (fibonacci (- n 1)) (fibonacci (- n 2)))))))
CL-USER> (progn (fibonacci 6) nil)
1
2
1
3
1
2
5
NIL
You'll see some repeated parts there, since there's redundant computation. You can compute the series much more efficiently, however, by starting from the first two numbers, and counting up:
(defun fibonacci (n)
(do ((a 1 b)
(b 1 (print (+ a b)))
(n n (1- n)))
((zerop n) b)))
CL-USER> (fibonacci 6)
2
3
5
8
13
21
An option to keep the basic structure you used is to pass an additional flag to the function that tells if you want printing or not:
(defun fibo (n printseq)
(cond
((= n 1) (if printseq (print 0) 0))
((= n 2) (if printseq (print 1) 1))
(T
(let ((a (fibo (- n 1) printseq))
(b (fibo (- n 2) NIL)))
(if printseq (print (+ a b)) (+ a b))))))
The idea is that when you do the two recursive calls only in the first you pass down the flag about doing the printing and in the second call instead you just pass NIL to avoid printing again.
(defun fib (n a b)
(print (write-to-string n))
(print b)
(if (< n 100000)
(funcall (lambda (n a b) (fib n a b)) (+ n 1) b (+ a b)))
)
(defun fibstart ()
(fib 1 0 1)
)
I have the following 2 functions that I wish to combine into one:
(defun fib (n)
(if (= n 0) 0 (fib-r n 0 1)))
(defun fib-r (n a b)
(if (= n 1) b (fib-r (- n 1) b (+ a b))))
I would like to have just one function, so I tried something like this:
(defun fib (n)
(let ((f0 (lambda (n) (if (= n 0) 0 (funcall f1 n 0 1))))
(f1 (lambda (a b n) (if (= n 1) b (funcall f1 (- n 1) b (+ a b))))))
(funcall f0 n)))
however this is not working. The exact error is *** - IF: variable F1 has no value
I'm a beginner as far as LISP goes, so I'd appreciate a clear answer to the following question: how do you write a recursive lambda function in lisp?
Thanks.
LET conceptually binds the variables at the same time, using the same enclosing environment to evaluate the expressions. Use LABELS instead, that also binds the symbols f0 and f1 in the function namespace:
(defun fib (n)
(labels ((f0 (n) (if (= n 0) 0 (f1 n 0 1)))
(f1 (a b n) (if (= n 1) b (f1 (- n 1) b (+ a b)))))
(f0 n)))
You can use Graham's alambda as an alternative to labels:
(defun fib (n)
(funcall (alambda (n a b)
(cond ((= n 0) 0)
((= n 1) b)
(t (self (- n 1) b (+ a b)))))
n 0 1))
Or... you could look at the problem a bit differently: Use Norvig's defun-memo macro (automatic memoization), and a non-tail-recursive version of fib, to define a fib function that doesn't even need a helper function, more directly expresses the mathematical description of the fib sequence, and (I think) is at least as efficient as the tail recursive version, and after multiple calls, becomes even more efficient than the tail-recursive version.
(defun-memo fib (n)
(cond ((= n 0) 0)
((= n 1) 1)
(t (+ (fib (- n 1))
(fib (- n 2))))))
You can try something like this as well
(defun fib-r (n &optional (a 0) (b 1) )
(cond
((= n 0) 0)
((= n 1) b)
(T (fib-r (- n 1) b (+ a b)))))
Pros: You don't have to build a wrapper function. Cond constructt takes care of if-then-elseif scenarios. You call this on REPL as (fib-r 10) => 55
Cons: If user supplies values to a and b, and if these values are not 0 and 1, you wont get correct answer