My homework is to implement a program that takes a function and binary tree and outputs a list of integers from the binary tree that fulfill the function (example: the function returns true if the number is even, thus the program's output will be a list of even integers).
I have the code here:
datatype 'a tree = Empty | Node of ('a tree * int * 'a tree)
fun collect (p, Empty) = []
|collect (p, Node (L, x, R)) =
if (p x) then x :: (collect (p, L) # collect (p, R))
else
collect (p, L) # collect (p, R);
which works fine, but the assignment REQUIRES I implement this function with exceptions. We are supposed to use value-carrying functions, but my code just won't work:
fun collect (p, Empty) = []
| collect (p, (Node(L, x, R))) =
if (p x) then (raise FoundSoFar [x])
else
(collect (p, L))#(collect (p, R))
handle FoundSoFar x => x # (collect (p, L))#(collect (p, R))
which compiles properly, but when I try the test code given by the teacher:
val L = Node (Node (Empty, 2, Empty), 5, Node (Empty, 6, Empty));
val R = Node (Empty, 12, Empty);
val T = Node (Node (L, 7, Node (Empty, 8, Empty)), 11, R);
val r = collect ((fn x => (x mod 2) = 0) , T);
I just get an uncaught exception error...
I either need help understanding whats wrong with my code, how to fix it, and\or how to properly implement value-carrying exceptions in SML, anything will help, thanks.
This part of your code doesn't make sense:
(collect (p, L))#(collect (p, R))
handle FoundSoFar x => x # (collect (p, L))#(collect (p, R))
If the handle part is run, that means (collect (p, L))#(collect (p, R)) threw an exception. But then what do you do when you handle it? You evaluate that exact same expression again (as part of the right side of the handle expression). So naturally, this evaluation will fail and throw the exact same exception again, kind of like this:
(collect (p, L))#(collect (p, R)) handle FoundSoFar x => raise FoundSoFar x
So in the end, it is as if you never caught the exception in the first place:
(collect (p, L))#(collect (p, R))
You probably wanted to catch the exception, and then do something useful with the value you caught, but not run the exact same expression that caused the exception to start with.
P.S. another unrelated issue in your code you want to consider is precedence. handle has higher precedence than if-then-else
Related
You can notice the v in the lambda in the function body, where is the v coming from, what it is based on?
(define (cached-assoc xs n)
(letrec ([memo (make-vector n #f)]
[acc 0]
[f (lambda(x)
(let ([ans (vector-assoc x memo)])
(if ans
(cdr ans)
(let ([new-ans (assoc x xs)])
(begin
(vector-set! memo acc (cons x new-ans))
(set! acc (if (= (+ acc 1)) 0 (+ acc 1)))
new-ans)))))])
(lambda (v) (f v))))
The whole expression is returning a lambda as a result, and in that lambda there's a formal parameter named v. It doesn't have a value yet, you'll need to call the lambda to bind a value to v and produce a result (assuming the code is working):
((letrec ([memo (make-vector n #f)] ; notice the extra opening `(`, we want to call the returned lambda
[acc 0]
[f (lambda(x)
(let ([ans (vector-assoc x memo)])
(if ans
(cdr ans)
(let ([new-ans (assoc x xs)])
(begin
(vector-set! memo acc (cons x new-ans))
(set! acc (if (= (+ acc 1)) 0 (+ acc 1)))
new-ans)))))])
(lambda (v) (f v)))
10) ; <- the value 10 gets bound to `v`
However, your code isn't right. You are referring to variables named n and xs, but they are not defined anywhere and need a value of their own. The procedure vector-assoc doesn't exist. Also, the lambda at the end is redundant, you could simply return f, there's no need to wrap it in an additional lambda. Finally: you should define the whole expression with a name, it'll make it easier to call it.
I won't go into more details because first you need to fix the function and make it work, and is not clear at all what you want to do - but that should be a separate question.
I asked a similar question before, I just want to make sure I understand the idea, in the -lambda(x)- line 4, what is the x, where it is coming from?
(define (cached-assoc xs n)
(letrec ([memo (make-vector n #f)]
[acc 0]
[f (lambda(x)
(let ([ans (vector-assoc x memo)])
(if ans
(cdr ans)
(let ([new-ans (assoc x xs)])
(begin
(vector-set! memo acc (cons x new-ans))
(set! acc (if (= (+ acc 1)) 0 (+ acc 1)))
new-ans)))))])
f))
Your cached-assoc procedure returns f, a function which has x as an unbound parameter. It doesn’t have a value yet, the value will be whatever you pass to it when you finally invoke it:
((cached-assoc xs n) 10)
In the above example x will be bound to 10, and xs and n will be whatever you defined for them before calling cached-assoc. I believe the source of the confusion is the fact that cached-assoc is returning a lambda, once you understand this it'll be clear.
I'm new to lisp, trying to understand how lisp works, and I don't know how exactly to work with a local variable inside a large function.
here I have a little exc that I send a number to a function and if it is divisible by 3, 5 and 7 I must return a list of (by3by5by7), if only by 7, return (by7) and so on....
here is my code:
(defun checknum(n)
let* (resultt '() ) (
if(not(and(plusp n ) (integerp n))) (cons nil resultt) (progn
(if (zerop (mod n 7)) (cons 'by7 resultt) (cons nil resultt))
(if (zerop (mod n 5)) (cons 'by5 resultt) (cons nil resultt))
(if (zerop (mod n 3)) (cons 'by3 resultt) (cons nil resultt) )) ))
but if i send 21 for ex, I only get nil, instead of (by3by7) I guess the local variable is not affected by my if statements and I don't know how to do it...
(cons x y) creates a new cons cell and disposes of the result. To change the value of a variable you need to use setq, setf, push or the like, for example:
(defun checknum (n)
(let ((resultt nil))
(when (and (plusp n) (integerp n))
(when (zerop (mod n 7)) (push 'by7 resultt))
(when (zerop (mod n 5)) (push 'by5 resultt))
(when (zerop (mod n 3)) (push 'by3 resultt)))
resultt))
or perhaps, more elegantly using an internal function to factor out the repetition:
(defun checknum (n)
(when (and (plusp n) (integerp n))
(labels ((sub (d nsym res)
(if (zerop (mod n d))
(cons nsym res)
res)))
(sub 7 'by7
(sub 5 'by5
(sub 3 'by3 nil)))))
Testing:
CL-USER> (checknum 12)
(BY3)
CL-USER> (checknum 15)
(BY3 BY5)
CL-USER> (checknum 105)
(BY3 BY5 BY7)
CL-USER> (checknum 21)
(BY3 BY7)
Most lisp forms/functions don't modify their arguments. The ones that do will be explicitly documented as doing so. See adjoin and pushnew, for instance, or remove and delete.
To the point of 'trying to understand how lisp works', writing the same function in various different ways helped me a lot, so you might want to think about how you can write your function without modifying a variable at all, and why and when you would want to / not want to use destructive modifications.
Something like the below makes two passes, and will be too slow if there are a large quantity of numbers you need to check, but doesn't destructively modify anything.
(defun checknum (n)
(remove nil
(mapcar #'(lambda (m sym)
(when (zerop (mod n m)) sym))
'(7 5 3)
'(by7 by5 by3))))
The above approach can be written to not require two passes, etc.
Quite often I need to replace subsequence of certain elements with another sequence of the same type, but, probably with different length. Implementation of such function is no challenge, this is what I use now:
(defun substitute* (new old where &key key (test #'eql))
(funcall (alambda (rest)
(aif (search old rest :key key :test test)
(concatenate (etypecase rest
(string 'string)
(vector 'vector)
(list 'list))
(subseq rest 0 it)
new
(self (subseq rest (+ it (length old)))))
rest))
where))
Works like this:
CL-USER> (substitute* '(x y) '(z) '(1 z 5 8 y z))
(1 X Y 5 8 Y X Y)
CL-USER> (substitute* "green button" "red button"
"here are red indicator, red button and red wire")
"here are red indicator, green button and red wire"
CL-USER> (substitute* #(4) #(2 2) #(2 2 2 2 2))
#(4 4 2)
You see, it's very handy and useful, so I've feeling that I'm reinventing wheel and it must be in the standard library, I just don't know its name (sometimes names are not obvious, you may search for filter while what you need is set-difference).
As a result of compromise between clarity and efficiency:
(defun substitute* (new old where &key key (test #'eql))
(let ((type (etypecase where
(string 'string)
(vector 'vector)
(list 'list)))
(new (coerce new 'list))
(old (coerce old 'list))
(where (coerce where 'list)))
(coerce (funcall (alambda (rest)
(aif (search old rest :key key :test test)
(append (remove-if (constantly t) rest :start it)
new
(self (nthcdr (+ it (length old)) rest)))
rest))
where)
type)))
I don't think that there's any standard function for this. It's more complicated than the standard replace family of functions. Those can operate destructively because you know in advance that you can replace element by element. Even in that case, it's still somewhat difficult to do this efficiently, because the access time for lists and vectors is very different, so general-purpose functions like subseq can be problematic. As Rainer Joswig pointed out in a comment:
It's kind of unfortunate that for many algorithms over sequences there
is no single efficient implementation. I see often that there are two
versions, one for lists and one for vectors, which then get hidden
behind a dispatching function. For a hack a simple common version is
fine, but for a library function, often there are different
implementations - like shown here.
(In fact, in doing a bit of research on whether some library contains a function for this, one of the first Google results I got was a question on Code Review, Generic sequence splitter in Common Lisp, in which Rainer and I both had some comment similar to those here.)
A version for lists
However, your implementation is rather inefficient because it makes multiple copies of the the remainders of sequences. E.g., when you replace (z) in (1 z 2 z 3 z), with (x y), you'll first make (3 x y), then copy it in making (2 x y 3 z y), and then you'll copy that in making (1 x y 2 x y 3 x y). You might be better off in doing one pass over the sequence, determining the indices of the subsequences to replace, or collecting the bits that need to don't need to be replaced, etc. You'll probably want separate implementations for lists and for other sequences. E.g., with a list, you might do:
(defun splice-replace-list (old new list)
(do ((new (coerce new 'list))
(old-len (length old))
(parts '()))
((endp list)
(reduce 'append (nreverse parts) :from-end t))
(let ((pos (search old list)))
(push (subseq list 0 pos) parts)
(cond
((null pos)
(setf list nil))
(t
(push new parts)
(setf list (nthcdr (+ old-len pos) list)))))))
There are some optimizations you could make here, if you wanted. For instance, you could implement a search-list that, rather than returning the position of the first instance of the sought sequence, could return a copy of the head up until that point and the tail beginning with the sequence as multiple values, or even the copied head, and the tail after the sequence, since that's what you're really interested in, in this case. Additionally, you could do something a bit more efficient than (reduce 'append (nreverse parts) :from-end t) by not reversing parts, but using a reversed append. E.g.,
(flet ((xappend (l2 l1)
(append l1 l2)))
(reduce #'xappend '((5 6) (x y) (3 4) (x y))))
;=> (x y 3 4 x y 5 6)
I wrote this in a somewhat imperative style, but there's no reason that you can't use a functional style if you want. Be warned that not all Lisp implementation support tail call optimization, so it might be better to use do, but you certainly don't have to. Here's a more functional version:
(defun splice-replace-list (old new list)
(let ((new-list (coerce new 'list))
(old-len (length old)))
(labels ((keep-going (list parts)
(if (endp list)
(reduce 'append (nreverse parts) :from-end t)
(let* ((pos (search old list))
(parts (list* (subseq list 0 pos) parts)))
(if (null pos)
(keep-going '() parts)
(keep-going (nthcdr (+ old-len pos) list)
(list* new-list parts)))))))
(keep-going list '()))))
A version for vectors
For non lists, this is more difficult, because you don't have the specific sequence type that you're supposed to be using for the result. This is why functions like concatenate require a result-type argument. You can use array-element-type to get an element type for the input sequence, and then use make-array to get a sequence big enough to hold the result. That's trickier code, and will be more complicated. E.g., here's a first attempt. It's more complicated, but you'll get a result that's pretty close to the original vector type:
(defun splice-replace-vector (old new vector &aux (new-len (length new)))
(flet ((assemble-result (length parts)
(let ((result (make-array length :element-type (array-element-type vector)))
(start 0))
(dolist (part parts result)
(cond
((consp part)
(destructuring-bind (begin . end) part
(replace result vector :start1 start :start2 begin :end2 end)
(incf start (- end begin))))
(t
(replace result new :start1 start)
(incf start new-len)))))))
(do ((old-len (length old))
(total-len 0)
(start 0)
(indices '()))
((null start) (assemble-result total-len (nreverse indices)))
(let ((pos (search old vector :start2 start)))
(cond
((null pos)
(let ((vlength (length vector)))
(push (cons start vlength) indices)
(incf total-len (- vlength start))
(setf start nil)))
(t
(push (cons start pos) indices)
(push t indices)
(incf total-len (- pos start))
(incf total-len new-len)
(setf start (+ pos old-len))))))))
CL-USER> (splice-replace-vector '(#\z) '(#\x #\y) "12z")
"12xy"
CL-USER> (splice-replace-vector '(z) '(x y) #(x y))
#(X Y)
CL-USER> (splice-replace-vector '(z) '(x y) #(1 z 2 z 3 4 z))
#(1 X Y 2 X Y 3 4 X Y)
CL-USER> (splice-replace-vector '(#\z) #(#\x #\y) "1z2z34z")
"1xy2xy34xy"
If you only want to make one pass through the input vector, then you could use an adjustable array as the output, and append to it. An adjustable array will have a bit more overhead than a fixed size array, but it does make the code a bit simpler.
(defun splice-replace-vector (old new vector)
(do ((vlength (length vector))
(vnew (coerce new 'vector))
(nlength (length new))
(result (make-array 0
:element-type (array-element-type vector)
:adjustable t
:fill-pointer 0))
(start 0))
((eql start vlength) result)
(let ((pos (search old vector :start2 start)))
(cond
;; add the remaining elements in vector to result
((null pos)
(do () ((eql start vlength))
(vector-push-extend (aref vector start) result)
(incf start)))
;; add the elements between start and pos to the result,
;; add a copy of new to result, and increment start
;; accordingly
(t
;; the copying here could be improved with adjust-array,
;; and replace, instead of repeated calls to vector-push-extend
(do () ((eql start pos))
(vector-push-extend (aref vector start) result)
(incf start))
(loop for x across vnew
do (vector-push-extend x result))
(incf start (1- nlength)))))))
A “generic” version
Using these two functions, you could define a general splice-replace that checks the type of the original input sequence and calls the appropriate function:
(defun splice-replace (old new sequence)
(etypecase sequence
(list (splice-replace-list old new sequence))
(vector (splice-replace-vector old new sequence))))
CL-USER> (splice-replace #(z) '(x y) #(1 z 2 z 3 4 z))
#(1 X Y 2 X Y 3 4 X Y)
CL-USER> (splice-replace '(z) #(x y) '(1 z 2 z 3 4 z))
(1 X Y 2 X Y 3 4 X Y)
I'm trying to find the first missing key in a hash table, that should contain keys [1 ... N], using Scheme.
So far, I have the following code:
(define (find-missing n ht)
(define c 1)
(let forVertices ()
(cond (not (hash-has-key? ht c))
(c)
)
(set! c (+ c 1))
(when (>= n c) (forVertices))
)
)
When I execute the function to test it, nothing is returned. What am I doing wrong?
You have a couple of problems with the parentheses, and the else case is missing. This should fix the mistakes:
(define (find-missing n ht)
(define c 1)
(let forVertices ()
(cond ((not (hash-has-key? ht c))
c)
(else
(set! c (+ c 1))
(when (>= n c)
(forVertices))))))
… But you should be aware that the way you wrote the procedure is not idiomatic, at all. In general, in Scheme you should avoid mutating state (the set! operation), you can write an equivalent procedure by correctly setting up the recursion and passing the right parameters. Also, it's a good idea to return something whenever the recursion exits (for instance: #f), otherwise your procedure will return #<void> if there are no keys missing. Here, this is what I mean:
(define (find-missing n ht)
(let forVertices ((c 1))
(cond ((> c n) #f)
((not (hash-has-key? ht c)) c)
(else (forVertices (+ c 1))))))