I trying to write a function which gets an integer number , represented by string , and check if all his chars are digits and return #t \ #f accordingly . Thats the code -
(define (splitString str) (list->vector (string->list str)))
(define myVector 0)
(define flag #t)
(define (checkIfStringLegal str) (
(set! myVector (splitString str))
(do ( (i 0 (+ i 1)) ) ; init
((= i (vector-length myVector)) flag) ; stop condition
(cond ((>= 48 (char->integer (vector-ref myVector i)) ) (set! flag #f))
((<= 57 (char->integer (vector-ref myVector i)) )(set! flag #f))
)
)
)
)
Few explanations -
(list->vector (string->list str)) - convert string the char list .
(vector-ref myVector i) - char from the myVector at place i .
Its run OK , but when I try to use this func , like (checkIfStringLegal "444") I get -
application: not a procedure;
expected a procedure that can be applied to arguments
given: #<void>
arguments...:
#t
Try this:
(define (checkIfStringLegal str)
(andmap char-numeric?
(string->list str)))
This is how the procedure works:
It transforms the string into a list of characters, using string->list
It validates each character in the list to see if it's a number, applying the predicate char-numeric? to each one
If all the validations returned #t, andmap will return #t. If a single validation failed, andmap will return #f immediately
That's a functional-programming solution (and after all, this question is tagged as such), notice that your intended approach looks more like a solution in a C-like programming language - using vectors, explicit looping constructs (do), mutation operations (set!), global mutable definitions ... that's fine and it might eventually work after some tweaking, but it's not the idiomatic way to do things in Scheme, and it's not even remotely a functional-programming solution.
EDIT:
Oh heck, I give up. If you want to write the solution your way, this will work - you had a parenthesis problem, and please take good notice of the proper way to indent and close parenthesis in Scheme, it will make your code more readable for you and for others:
(define (splitString str) (list->vector (string->list str)))
(define myVector 0)
(define flag #t)
(define (checkIfStringLegal str)
(set! myVector (splitString str))
(do ((i 0 (+ i 1)))
((= i (vector-length myVector)) flag)
(cond ((>= 48 (char->integer (vector-ref myVector i)))
(set! flag #f))
((<= 57 (char->integer (vector-ref myVector i)))
(set! flag #f)))))
Even so, the code could be further improved, I'll leave that as an exercise for the reader:
Both conditions can be collapsed into a single condition, using an or
The exit condition should be: end the loop when the end of the vector is reached or the flag is false
Related
I'm trying to do a recursive version of the function position called positionRec. The objective is define the position of an element in a list, and if the element is not in the list return "nil". For exemple:
(positionRec 'a '(b c d a e)) => 4
(positionRec 'a '(b c d e)) => nil
I have written:
(defun positionRec (c l)
(cond
((atom l) (return nil))
((equal c (first l)) 1)
(t (+ 1 (positionRec c (rest l)))) ) )
I don't succeed to return nil. I have an error "*** - return-from: no block named nil is currently visible"
Anyone can teach me how to do it?
Lisp is an expression language: it has only expressions an no statemends. This means that the value of a call to a function is simply the value of the last form involved in that call This is different than many languages which have both statements and expressions and where you have to explicitly litter your code with explicit returns to say what the value of a function call is.
A cond form in turn is an expression. The value of an expression like
(cond
(<test1> <test1-form1> ... <test1-formn>)
(<test2> <test1-form1> ... <test1-formn>)
...
(<testn> <testn-form1> ... <testn-formnn>))
is the <testm-formn> of the first <testm> which is true, or nil if none of them are (and as a special case, if there are no forms after a test which is true the value is the value of that test).
So in your code you just need to make sure that the last form in the test which succeeds is the value you want:
(defun positionRec (c l)
(cond
((atom l) nil)
((equal c (first l)) 1)
(t (+ 1 (positionRec c (rest l))))))
So, what use is return? Well, sometimes you really do want to say 'OK, in the middle of some complicated loop or something, and I'm done now':
(defun complicated-search (...)
(dolist (...)
(dolist (...)
(dotimes (...)
(when <found-the-interesting-thing>
(return-from complicated-search ...))))))
return itself is simply equivalent to (return-from nil ...) and various constructs wrap blocks named nil around their bodies. Two such, in fact, are dotimes and dolist, so if you want to escape from a big loop early you can do that:
(defun complicated-search (...)
(dolist (...)
(when ...
(return 3)))) ;same as (return-from nil 3)
But in general because Lisp is an expression language you need to use return / return-from much less often than you do in some other languages.
In your case, the modified function is going to fail: if you get to the ((atom l) nil) case, then it will return nil to its parent which will ... try to add 1 to that. A better approach is to keep count of where you are:
(defun position-of (c l)
(position-of-loop c l 1))
(defun position-of-loop (c l p)
(cond
((atom l) nil)
((equal c (first l)) p)
(t (position-of-loop c (rest l) (1+ p)))))
Note that this (as your original) uses 1-based indexing: zero-based would be more compatible with the rest of CL.
It would probably be idiomatic to make position-of-loop a local function:
(defun position-of (c l)
(labels ((position-of-loop (lt p)
(cond
((atom lt) nil)
((equal c (first lt)) p)
(t (position-of-loop (rest lt) (1+ p))))))
(position-of-loop l 1)))
And you could then use an iteration macro if you wanted to make it a bit more concise:
(defun position-of (c l)
(iterate position-of-loop ((lt l) (p 1))
(cond
((atom lt) nil)
((equal c (first lt)) p)
(t (position-of-loop (rest lt) (1+ p))))))
The main problem is that you're trying to deal with incommensurable values. On the one hand, you want to deak with numbers, on the other, you want to deal with the empty list. You cannot add a number to a list, but you will inherently try doing so (you have an unconditional (1+ ...) call in your default branch in your cond).
There are ways to work around that, one being to capture the value:
(cond
...
(t (let ((val (positionRec c (rest l))))
(when val ;; Here we "pun" on nil being both false and the "not found" value
(1+ val)))))
Another would be to use a method amenable to tail-recursion:
(defun positionrec (element list &optional (pos 1))
(cond ((null list) nil)
((eql element (head list)) pos)
(t (positionrec element (rest list) (1+ pos)))))
The second function can (with a sufficently smart compiler) be turned into, basically, a loop. The way it works is by passing the return value as an optional parameter.
You could build a version using return, but you would probably need to make use of labels for that to be straight-forward (if you return nil directly from the function, it still ends up in the (1+ ...), where you then have numerical incompatibility) so I would go with either "explicitly capture the value and do the comparison against nil/false" or "the version amenable to tail-call elimination" and simply pick the one you find the most readable.
I'm new to Racket and trying to learn it. I'm working through some problems that I'm struggling with. Here is what the problem is asking:
Write a definition for the recursive function occur that takes a data expression a and a list s and returns the number of times that the data expression a appears in the list s.
Example:
(occur '() '(1 () 2 () () 3)) =>3
(occur 1 '(1 2 1 ((3 1)) 4 1)) => 3 (note that it only looks at whole elements in the list)
(occur '((2)) '(1 ((2)) 3)) => 1
This is what I have written so far:
(define occur
(lambda (a s)
(cond
((equal? a (first s))
(else (occur a(rest s))))))
I'm not sure how to implement the count. The next problem is similar and I have no idea how to approach that. Here is what this problem says:
(This is similar to the function above, but it looks inside the sublists as well) Write a recursive function atom-occur?, which takes two inputs, an atom a and a list s, and outputs the Boolean true if and only if a appears somewhere within s, either as one of the data expressions in s, or as one of the data expression in one of the data expression in s, or…, and so on.
Example:
(atom-occur? 'a '((x y (p q (a b) r)) z)) => #t
(atom-occur? 'm '(x (y p (1 a (b 4)) z))) => #f
Any assistance would be appreciated. Thank you.
In Racket, the standard way to solve this problem would be to use built-in procedures:
(define occur
(lambda (a s)
(count (curry equal? a) s)))
But of course, you want to implement it from scratch. Don't forget the base case (empty list), and remember to add one unit whenever a new match is found. Try this:
(define occur
(lambda (a s)
(cond
((empty? s) 0)
((equal? a (first s))
(add1 (occur a (rest s))))
(else (occur a (rest s))))))
The second problem is similar, but it uses the standard template for traversing a list of lists, where we go down on the recursion on both the first and the rest of the input list, and only test for equality when we're in an atom:
(define atom-occur?
(lambda (a s)
(cond
((empty? s) #f)
((not (pair? s))
(equal? a s))
(else (or (atom-occur? a (first s))
(atom-occur? a (rest s)))))))
I'm quite new to functional programming, especially Scheme as used below. I'm trying to make the following function that is recursive, tail recursive.
Basically, what the function does, is scores the alignment of two strings. When given two strings as input, it compares each "column" of characters and accumulates a score for that alignment, based on a scoring scheme that is implemented in a function called scorer that is called by the function in the code below.
I sort of have an idea of using a helper function to accumulate the score, but I'm not too sure how to do that, hence how would I go about making the function below tail-recursive?
(define (alignment-score string_one string_two)
(if (and (not (= (string-length string_one) 0))
(not (=(string-length string_two) 0)))
(+ (scorer (string-ref string_one 0)
(string-ref string_two 0))
(alignment-score-not-tail
(substring string_one 1 (string-length string_one))
(substring string_two 1 (string-length string_two))
)
)
0)
)
Just wanted to make an variant of Chris' answer that uses lists of chars:
(define (alignment-score s1 s2)
(let loop ((score 0)
(l1 (string->list s1))
(l2 (string->list s2)))
(if (or (null? l1) (null? l2))
score
(loop (+ score (scorer (car l1)
(car l2)))
(cdr l1)
(cdr l2)))))
No use stopping there. Since this now have become list iteration we can use higher order procedure. Typically we want a fold-left or foldl and SRFI-1 fold is an implementation of that that doesn't require the lists to be of the same length:
; (import (scheme) (only (srfi :1) fold)) ; r7rs
; (import (rnrs) (only (srfi :1) fold)) ; r6rs
; (require srfi/1) ; racket
(define (alignment-score s1 s2)
(fold (lambda (a b acc)
(+ acc (scorer a b)))
0
(string->list s1)
(string->list s2)))
If you accumulating and the order doesn't matter always choose a left fold since it's always tail recursive in Scheme.
Here's how it would look like with accumulator:
(define (alignment-score s1 s2)
(define min-length (min (string-length s1) (string-length s2)))
(let loop ((score 0)
(index 0))
(if (= index min-length)
score
(loop (+ score (scorer (string-ref s1 index)
(string-ref s2 index)))
(+ index 1)))))
In this case, score is the accumulator, which starts as 0. We also have an index (also starting as 0) that keeps track of which position in the string to grab. The base case, when we reach the end of either string, is to return the accumulated score so far.
I'm a beginner to scheme and I'm trying to learn some arithmetic recursion. I can't seem to wrap my head around doing this using scheme and producing the correct results. For my example, I'm trying to produce a integer key for a string by doing arithmetic on each character in the string. In this case the string is a list such as: '(h e l l o). The arithmetic I need to perform is to:
For each character in the string do --> (33 * constant + position of letter in alphabet)
Where the constant is an input and the string is input as a list.
So far I have this:
(define alphaTest
(lambda (x)
(cond ((eq? x 'a) 1)
((eq? x 'b) 2))))
(define test
(lambda (string constant)
(if (null? string) 1
(* (+ (* 33 constant) (alphaTest (car string))) (test (cdr string)))
I am trying to test a simple string (test '( a b ) 2) but I cannot produce the correct result. I realize my recursion must be wrong but I've been toying with it for hours and hitting a wall each time. Can anyone provide any help towards achieving this arithmetic recursion? Please and thank you. Keep in mind I'm an amateur at Scheme language :)
EDIT
I would like to constant that's inputted to change through each iteration of the string by making the new constant = (+ (* 33 constant) (alphaTest (car string))). The output that I'm expecting for input string '(a b) and constant 2 should be as follows:
1st Iteration '(a): (+ (* 33 2) (1)) = 67 sum = 67, constant becomes 67
2nd Iteration '(b): (+ (* 33 67) (2)) = 2213 sum = 2213, constant becomes 2213
(test '(a b) 2) => 2280
Is this what you're looking for?
(define position-in-alphabet
(let ([A (- (char->integer #\A) 1)])
(λ (ch)
(- (char->integer (char-upcase ch)) A))))
(define make-key
(λ (s constant)
(let loop ([s s] [constant constant] [sum 0])
(cond
[(null? s)
sum]
[else
(let ([delta (+ (* 33 constant) (position-in-alphabet (car s)))])
(loop (cdr s) delta (+ sum delta)))]))))
(make-key (string->list ) 2) => 0
(make-key (string->list ab) 2) => 2280
BTW, is the procedure supposed to work on strings containing characters other than letters—like numerals or spaces? In that case, position-in-alphabet might yield some surprising results. To make a decent key, you might just call char->integer and not bother with position-in-alphabet. char->integer will give you a different number for each character, not just each letter in the alphabet.
(define position-in-alphabet
(let ([A (- (char->integer #\A) 1)])
(lambda (ch)
(- (char->integer (char-upcase ch)) A))))
(define (test chars constant)
(define (loop chars result)
(if (null? chars)
result
(let ((r (+ (* 33 result) (position-in-alphabet (car chars)))))
(loop (rest chars) (+ r result)))))
(loop chars constant))
(test (list #\a #\b) 2)
Here's a solution (in MIT-Gnu Scheme):
(define (alphaTest x)
(cond ((eq? x 'a) 1)
((eq? x 'b) 2)))
(define (test string constant)
(if (null? string)
constant
(test (cdr string)
(+ (* 33 constant) (alphaTest (car string))))))
Sample outputs:
(test '(a) 2)
;Value: 67
(test '(a b) 2)
;Value: 2213
I simply transform the constant in each recursive call and return it as the value when the string runs out.
I got rid of the lambda expressions to make it easier to see what's happening. (Also, in this case the lambda forms are not really needed.)
Your test procedure definition appears to be broken:
(define test
(lambda (string constant)
(if (null? string)
1
(* (+ (* 33 constant)
(alphaTest (car string)))
(test (cdr string)))
Your code reads as:
Create a procedure test that accepts two arguments; string and constant.
If string is null, pass value 1, to end the recursion. Otherwise, multiply the following values:
some term x that is = (33 * constant) + (alphaTest (car string)), and
some term y that is the output of recursively passing (cdr string) to the test procedure
I don't see how term y will evaluate, as 'test' needs two arguments. My interpreter threw an error. Also, the parentheses are unbalanced. And there's something weird about the computation that I can't put my finger on -- try to do a paper evaluation to see what might be getting computed in each recursive call.
I'm new to lisp and trying to write a recursive function that returns minimum number from a list. It also wants to detect atom. The following code returns error:
(defun minFromList (l)
(cond ((null l) nil) ; Causes error shown below
; (cond ((null l) ) ; Causes the same error
; (cond ((null l) 0) ; It causes always 0 to be the final return val.
((numberp l) l)
((numberp (car l)) (min (car l) (minFromList(cdr l))))
((listp (car l)) (min (minFromList (car l)) (minFromList (cdr l))))
(t nil) ; if all condition doesn't hold just return nil.
)
)
Error:
*** - MIN: NIL is not a real number
Apparently the problem lies in where it returns nil/0 when the given list is null. What's possible workarounds? Thank you.
Environment) Ubuntu 11.10, clisp 2.49
Update) Although I already picked up this as the answer, I welcome if there are other ways especially w/o making new functions if any.
Here's the simplest code I made inspired by the chosen answer.
(defun minNum (a b)
(cond ((null a) b)
((null b) a)
(t (min a b)))
)
Apparently you get an error message because you try to use the result of your function as a number, and said result is nil when the function is called with an empty list as argument, so the evaluation that tries to use the result fails. This is not a Common Lisp problem - you have to decide what to return when the argument is empty. Maybe 0 is a good value, maybe some approximation of minus infinity - only you (or whoever uses your function) can tell.
As for getting the the minimum (or the sum or any other 'reduction') of a list, this is a pattern already handled by the reduce Common Lisp standard function. So min-from-list could look something like:
CL-USER> (defun min-from-list (list &optional (default 0))
(reduce #'min list :initial-value default))
MIN-FROM-LIST
CL-USER> (min-from-list '(1 2 -3))
-3
CL-USER> (min-from-list '(1 2 -3) -7)
-7
CL-USER> (min-from-list '())
0
CL-USER> (min-from-list '() -3)
-3
(the user can specify what the minimum of an empty list is - if none specified, it's 0).
When comparing two numbers, you need to deal with the nil case in some way. This is easy to do. Define your own version of min that satisfies
(min2 nil <x>) = <x>
(min2 <x> nil) = <x>
(min2 <x> <y>) = (min <x> <y>) if <x>, <y> non-null
and use that.
The simplest approach I can think of is to wrap an application of min.
(defun min-or-nil (num-list)
(when num-list (apply #'min num-list)))