I want to take an interval of a vector in Scheme. I know there is a procedure named vector->values, but seems like it returns each element separately, while I want to get the result as a vector. How can I achieve this?
> (vector->values (vector 1 2 3 4 5) 0 3)
1
2
3
while I need:
#(1 2 3)
If you're using PLT, you have a few easy ways to get this:
(define (subvector v start end)
(list->vector (for/list ([i (in-vector v start end)]) i)))
(define (subvector v start end)
(build-vector (- end start) (lambda (i) (vector-ref v (+ i start)))))
(define (subvector v start end)
(define new (make-vector (- end start)))
(vector-copy! new 0 v start end)
new)
The last one is probably going to be the fastest. The reason that there is no such operation that is built-in is that people usually don't do that. When you're dealing with vectors in Scheme, you're usually doing so because you want to optimize something so returning a vector and a range instead of allocating a new one is more common.
(And if you think that this is useful, please suggest it on the PLT mailing list.)
The Scheme R6RS standard has make-vector, vector-ref, vector-set! and vector-length. With that you can write your own function subvector, which does not seem to be part of R6RS (!). Some Scheme implementation have something like subvector already.
You can also switch to Common Lisp, which provides the function SUBSEQ in the standard.
Here is a portable R6RS version using SRFI 43:
#!r6rs
(import (rnrs base)
(prefix (srfi :43) srfi/43:))
(srfi/43:vector-copy (vector 1 2 3 4 5) 0 3)
#lang scheme
(define (my-vector-value v l h c)
(if (and (>= c l) (< c h))
(cons (first v) (my-vector-value (rest v) l h (add1 c)))
empty))
(list->vector (my-vector-value (vector->list (vector 1 2 3 4 5)) 0 3 0))
Ghetto? Yes, very. But it only took two minutes to write and gets the job done.
(I find it's generally easier to play with lists in Scheme)
you want subvector:
(subvector (vector 1 2 3 4 5) 0 3)
Related
According to the book, this is what the function definition is,
The function scramble takes a non-empty tuple in which no argument is greater than its own index and returns a tuple of same length. Each number in the argument is treated as a backward index from its own position to a point earlier in tuple. The result at each position is obtained by counting backward from the current position according to this index.
And these are some examples,
; Examples of scramble
(scramble '(1 1 1 3 4 2 1 1 9 2)) ; '(1 1 1 1 1 4 1 1 1 9)
(scramble '(1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9)) ; '(1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1)
(scramble '(1 2 3 1 2 3 4 1 8 2 10)) ; '(1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 8 2)
Here is the implementation,
(define pick
(λ (i lat)
(cond
((eq? i 1) (car lat))
(else (pick (sub1 i)
(cdr lat))))))
(define scramble-b
(lambda (tup rev-pre)
(cond
((null? tup) '())
(else
(cons (pick (car tup) (cons (car tup) rev-pre))
(scramble-b (cdr tup)
(cons (car tup) rev-pre)))))))
(define scramble
(lambda (tup)
(scramble-b tup '())))
This is a case where using a very minimal version of the language means that the code is verbose enough that understanding the algorithm is not perhaps easy.
One way of dealing with this problem is to write the program in a much richer language, and then work out how the algorithm, which is now obvious, is implemented in the minimal version. Let's pick Racket as the rich language.
Racket has a function (as does Scheme) called list-ref: (list-ref l i) returns the ith element of l, zero-based.
It also has a nice notion of 'sequences' which are pretty much 'things you can iterate over' and a bunch of constructs whose names begin with for for iterating over sequences. There are two functions which make sequences we care about:
in-naturals makes an infinite sequence of the natural numbers, which by default starts from 0, but (in-naturals n) starts from n.
in-list makes a sequence from a list (a list is already a sequence in fact, but in-list makes things clearer and there are rumours also faster).
And the iteration construct we care about is for/list which iterates over some sequences and collects the result from its body into a list.
Given these, then the algorithm is almost trivial: we want to iterate along the list, keeping track of the current index and then do the appropriate subtraction to pick a value further back along the list. The only non-trivial bit is dealing with zero- vs one-based indexing.
(define (scramble l)
(for/list ([index (in-naturals)]
[element (in-list l)])
(list-ref l (+ (- index element) 1))))
And in fact if we cause in-naturals to count from 1 we can avoid the awkward adding-1:
(define (scramble l)
(for/list ([index (in-naturals 1)]
(element (in-list l)))
(list-ref l (- index element))))
Now looking at this code, even if you don't know Racket, the algorithm is very clear, and you can check it gives the answers in the book:
> (scramble '(1 1 1 3 4 2 1 1 9 2))
'(1 1 1 1 1 4 1 1 1 9)
Now it remains to work out how the code in the book implements the same algorithm. That's fiddly, but once you know what the algorithm is it should be straightforward.
If the verbal description looks vague and hard to follow, we can try following the code itself, turning it into a more visual pseudocode as we go:
pick i [x, ...ys] =
case i {
1 --> x ;
pick (i-1) ys }
==>
pick i xs = nth1 i xs
(* 1 <= i <= |xs| *)
scramble xs =
scramble2 xs []
scramble2 xs revPre =
case xs {
[] --> [] ;
[x, ...ys] -->
[ pick x [x, ...revPre],
...scramble2 ys
[x, ...revPre]] }
Thus,
scramble [x,y,z,w, ...]
=
[ nth1 x [x] (*x=1..1*)
, nth1 y [y,x] (*y=1..2*)
, nth1 z [z,y,x] (*z=1..3*)
, nth1 w [w,z,y,x] (*w=1..4*)
, ... ]
Thus each element in the input list is used as an index into the reversed prefix of that list, up to and including that element. In other words, an index into the prefix while counting backwards, i.e. from the element to the left, i.e. towards the list's start.
So we have now visualized what the code is doing, and have also discovered requirements for its input list's elements.
I'm trying to get the lowest integer out of a vector only containing numbers. I know how to do it with lists. You compare the first two values of the list and depending on which is larger you either save your value to output it later or call the function again with the rest of the list (all elements except the first) using the cdr procedure.
But with vectors I'm completely lost. My guess would be that the way of thinking about the solution would be the same for lists and vectors. I've been reading on the racket-lang website but haven't been able to come up with a solution to the problem. The procedures I've been experimenting most with are vector-ref and vector-length as they seem to be the most useful in this problem (but this is my first time working with vectors so what do I know).
So my two questions are:
How can we get all values except the first from a vector? Is there a procedure like cdr but for vectors?
If you were working with lists you would use cons to save the values you would want to output. But is there a similar way of doing it when working with vectors?
Thanks!
The simplest solution is to use a variant of for called for/fold.
I thought there were an for/min but alas.
#lang racket
(define v (vector 11 12 13 4 15 16))
(for/fold ([m +inf.0]) ([x (in-vector v)])
(min m x))
If you like a more explicit approach:
(define (vector-min xs)
(define n (vector-length xs))
(let loop ([i 0] ; running index
[m +inf.0]) ; minimum value so far
(cond
[(= i n) ; if the end is reached
m] ; return the minimum
[else ; else
(define x (vector-ref v i)) ; get new element in vector
(loop (+ i 1) ; increment index
(min m x))]))) ; new minimum
UPDATE
(let loop ([x 1] [y 10])
(loop (+ x 1) (- y 1))
is the same as:
(let ()
(define (loop (x y)
(loop (+ x 1) (- y 1)))
(loop 1 10))
Vectors are O(1) access and indexed so it is a completely different data structure, however you have SEFI-43 which is like the SRFI-1 List library, but for vectors.
#lang racket
(require srfi/43)
(define (min-element lst)
(vector-fold min (vector-ref lst 0) lst))
(max-element #(7 8 1 2 3 4 5 12))
; ==> 1
The racket/vector module has vector-argmin for finding the minimum element of a vector (Well, the minimum after feeding the elements through a transformation function). Combine that with a function like identity from racket/function and it's trivial:
(vector-argmin identity '#(5 4 3 2 1 6))
I solved Project Euler's 8th problem using SBCL and the iterate package from quicklisp. In my code I defined a function that turns a number into a list of it's digits. Here's the source code:
(defun number-to-list (n)
(iter (for c in-string (write-to-string n)) (collect (digit-char-p c))))
The collect clause both in iter and in loop make a list out of the values. Is it possible to instead generate a vector (one dimensional array)?
Would my only option be to convert the list generated by number-to-list to a vector? Because that seems inefficient (although probably not that inefficient)
Usually there is one big problem: how large will the result vector be? It would be best to know that upfront, then we can allocate the vector once with the correct size. Otherwise we would have find ways to deal with that: use a resizable vector, allocate a list first and copy into a result vector later, allocate a larger vector with a fill pointer, ...
If you have a sequence, then one can use the Common Lisp function MAP: if the source object is a vector, here a string, its length is cheap to get.
CL-USER 1 > (map 'vector
#'digit-char-p
(write-to-string 5837457324534))
#(5 8 3 7 4 5 7 3 2 4 5 3 4)
You can use ITERATE and collect a vector:
FOO 32 > (defun number-to-vector (n)
(iter (for c in-string (write-to-string n))
(collect (digit-char-p c) result-type vector)))
NUMBER-TO-VECTOR
FOO 33 > (number-to-vector 8573475934)
#(8 5 7 3 4 7 5 9 3 4)
If you look at the macro expansion, it actually collects into a list and then calls COERCE to create the vector. So: no win in efficiency.
Note that this is another example where ITERATE is more powerful than LOOP: the standard LOOP can't directly return vectors from collect.
The proposed solutions are correct and elegant, but they first create a list, or trasform the number in string. I would like to propose a direct transformation from integers to arrays, without transforming first the number in a list or a string:
(defun digits(n)
"Transform a positive integer n in array of digits"
(let* ((logn (floor (log n 10)))
(result (make-array (1+ logn) :element-type '(integer 0 9))))
(loop for i downfrom logn to 0
do (setf (values n (aref result i)) (floor n 10)))
result))
The problem of allocating an array of the correct dimension is solved with the formula that gives the number of decimal digits of an integer n: ⌊log10 n⌋+1.
Maybe not a direct answer to your question but here are my num-to-list and list-to-num functions I frequently use.
(defun num-to-list-helper (n liste)
(cond ((< n 1) liste)
(t (num-to-list-helper (truncate (/ n 10)) (cons (rem n 10) liste))))))
(defun num-to-list (n)
(num-to-list-helper n nil))
(defun list-to-num-helper (liste n)
(if (null liste)
n
(list-to-num-helper (cdr liste)
(+ n (* (car liste) (expt 10 (1- (length liste))))))))
(defun list-to-num (liste)
(list-to-num-helper liste 0))
You could try these and see if there's an improvement over converting the number to string. Personally I don't prefer strings for numbers as I consider them as an ugly trick I was forced to do in my Java days.
You could also convert these functions to a version using vectors and see how they do.
I am still new in racket language.
I am implementing a switch case in racket but it is not working.
So, I shift into using the equal and condition. I want to know how can i call a function that takes input. for example: factorial(n) function
I want to call it in :
(if (= c 1) (factorial (n))
There are two syntax problems with this snippet:
(if (= c 1) (factorial (n)))
For starters, an if expression in Racket needs three parts:
(if <condition> <consequent> <alternative>)
The first thing to fix would be to provide an expression that will be executed when c equals 1, and another that will run if c is not equal to 1. Say, something like this:
(if (= c 1) 1 (factorial (n)))
Now the second problem: in Scheme, when you surround a symbol with parentheses it means that you're trying to execute a function. So if you write (n), the interpreter believes that n is a function with no arguments and that you're trying to call it. To fix this, simply remove the () around n:
(if (= c 1) 1 (factorial n))
Now that the syntax problems are out of the way, let's examine the logic. In Scheme, we normally use recursion to express solutions, but a recursion has to advance at some point, so it will eventually end. If you keep passing the same parameter to the recursion, without modifying it, you'll get caught in an infinite loop. Here's the proper way to write a recursive factorial procedure:
(define (factorial n)
(if (<= n 0) ; base case: if n <= 0
1 ; then return 1
(* n (factorial (- n 1))))) ; otherwise multiply and advance recursion
Notice how we decrement n at each step, to make sure that it will eventually reach zero, ending the recursion. Once you get comfortable with this solution, we can think of making it better. Read about tail recursion, see how the compiler will optimize our loops as long as we write them in such a way that the last thing done on each execution path is the recursive call, with nothing left to do after it. For instance, the previous code can be written more efficiently as follows, and see how we pass the accumulated answer in a parameter:
(define (factorial n)
(let loop ([n n] [acc 1])
(if (<= n 0)
acc
(loop (- n 1) (* n acc)))))
UPDATE
After taking a look at the comments, I see that you want to implement a switchcase procedure. Once again, there are problems with the way you're declaring functions. This is wrong:
(define fact(x)
The correct way is this:
(define (fact x)
And for actually implementing switchcase, it's possible to use nested ifs as you attempted, but that's not the best way. Learn how to use the cond expression or the case expression, either one will make your solution simpler. And anyway you have to provide an additional condition, in case c is neither 1 nor 2. Also, you're confounding the parameter name - is it c or x? With all the recommendations in place, here's how your code should look:
(define (switchcase c)
(cond ((= c 1) (fact c))
((= c 2) (triple c))
(else (error "unknown value" c))))
In racket-lang, conditionals with if has syntax:
(if <expr> <expr> <expr>)
So in your case, you have to provide another <expr>.
(define (factorial n)
(if (= n 1) 1 (* n (factorial (- n 1)))))
;^exp ^exp ^exp
(factorial 3)
The results would be 6
Update:
(define (factorial n)
(if (= n 1) 1 (* n (factorial (- n 1)))))
(define (triple x)
(* 3 x))
(define (switchcase c)
(if (= c 1)
(factorial c)
(if(= c 2)
(triple c) "c is not 1 or 2")))
(switchcase 2)
If you want something a lot closer to a switch case given you can return procedures.
(define (switch input cases)
(let ((lookup (assoc input cases)))
(if lookup
(cdr lookup)
(error "Undefined case on " input " in " cases))))
(define (this-switch c)
(let ((cases (list (cons 1 triple)
(cons 2 factorial))))
((switch c cases) c)))
I'm unsure of how to turn count-forwards into a tail-recursive program. It takes a non-negative number, n, and returns the list of integers from 0 to n (including n).
Edit: Okay, I finally got this one to work. The problem wasn't that my current program was recursive and I needed to make it tail-recursive- It was just plain wrong. The actual answer is really short and clean. So if anyone else is stuck on this and is also a total programming noob, here's a few hints that might help:
1) Your helper program is designed to keep track of the list so far.
2) Its base case is.. If x = 0.. what do you do? add 0 onto.. something.
3) Recur on x - 1, and then add x onto your list so far.
4) When you get to your actual program, count-forwards, all you need is the helper. But remember that it takes two arguments!
The only recursive function here is list-reverse. It is tail-recursive, because the call to itself is the last operation in the function body.
Your function for generating a nondecreasing sequence from zero to m, which contains the successive results of adding 1 to the previous element, would look something like:
(define (my-reverse lst)
(define (rev-do xs ys)
(if (empty? xs)
ys
(rev-do (cdr xs) (cons (car xs) ys))))
(rev-do lst empty))
(define (seq m n)
(seq-do m n (list m)))
(define (seq-do m n xs)
(if (= m n)
(my-reverse xs)
(let ((next (add1 m)))
(seq-do next n (cons next xs)))))
(define (seq-from-zero m)
(seq 0 m))
Test:
> (seq-from-zero 10)
(0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10)
seq-do is a general function for generating nondecreasing sequences from m to n; it is tail-recursive, because the last operation is the call to itself.
I've also implemented reverse from scratch, so that you can use it in your homework problems.