I'm new to Racket and I was hoping to get more insights in the these two operators: , & ,#.
There's very little documentation of these new operators, however, to my understanding the former (,) unquotes everything if its is followed by a list. And the latter (,#) splices the values.
For example if the following is typed in the Dr. Racket interpreter:
(define scores '(1 3 2))
(define pets '(dog cat))
and then the following query is made:
`(,scores ,#pets)
this would yield : '((1 3 2) dog cat)
It would be appreciated if I could get more details, definitions and more examples about these operators.
Thanks in advance.
A single quote followed by the written representation of a value
will produce that value:
Example:
'(1 x "foo")
will produce a value that prints as (1 x "foo").
Suppose now that I don't want a literal symbol x in the list.
I have a variable x in my program, and I want to insert
the value to which x is bound.
To mark that I want the value of x rather than the symbol x,
I insert a comma before x:
'(1 ,x "foo")
It won't work as-is though - I now get a value that has a literal comma as well as a symbol x. The problem is that quote does not know about the comma convention.
Backtick or backquote knows about the comma-convention, so that will give the correct result:
> `(1 ,x "foo")
(1 3 "foo") ; if the value of x is 3
Now let's say x is the list (a b).
> `(1 ,x "foo")
(1 (a b) "foo") ; if the value of x is (a b)
This looks as expected. But what if I wanted (1 a b "foo")
as the result? We need a way so show "insert the elements of a list".
That's where ,# comes into the picture.
> `(1 ,#x "foo")
(1 a b "foo") ; if the value of x is (a b)
They are "reader abbreviations" or "reader macros". They are introduced in the section of the Racket guide on quasiquotation. To summarize:
`e reads as (quasiquote e)
,e reads as (unquote e)
,#e reads as (unquote-splicing e)
Because Racket's printer uses the same abbreviations by default, it can be confusing to test this yourself. Here are a few examples that should help:
> (equal? (list 'unquote 'abc) (read (open-input-string ",abc")))
#t
> (writeln (read (open-input-string ",abc")))
(unquote abc)
A more exhaustive description of the Racket reader is in the section on The Reader in the Racket Reference. A list of reader abbreviations is in the Reading Quotes subsection.
Related
In Common Lisp, given that "a" is simply a character, what is the difference between #\a, 'a #'a?
My question comes from the tutorialspoint.com tutorial on Lisp. At one point the tutorial introduces:
; a character array with all initial elements set to a
; is a string actually
(write(make-array 10 :element-type 'character :initial-element #\a))
(terpri)
; a two dimensional array with initial values a
(setq myarray (make-array '(2 2) :initial-element 'a :adjustable t))
(write myarray)
(terpri)
With the output:
"aaaaaaaaaa"
#2A((A A) (A A))
#' is not included in this example but I'm including it in the question because it can be confusing as well. 🙂
Thank you very much! 😊
To start, a is not "simply a character." The Lisp reader parses #\a as the character literal a, which is an object in Common Lisp. Note that #\a and #\A are different character objects.
When the Lisp reader encounters a single quote, the expression following the single quote is not evaluated. Specifically, 'a is treated as (quote a), where quote returns its argument unevaluated. Now, a is a symbol, so 'a evaluates to that symbol. But the Lisp reader upcases most characters it reads by default, so 'a really evaluates to the symbol A. The good news is that whether you type a or A, the Lisp reader will read A (unless you mess with the readtable), and both 'a and 'A evaluate to the symbol A.
When the Lisp reader encounters #'a, the entire expression is treated as (function a), which when evaluated returns the function associated with the name a. But, note that it is an error to use function, and by extension #', on an identifier that does not denote a function.
To clarify this last part a bit, consider the following REPL interaction:
CL-USER> (defvar a 1)
A
CL-USER> a
1
CL-USER> #'a
The function COMMON-LISP-USER::A is undefined.
[Condition of type UNDEFINED-FUNCTION]
Here the variable a is defined and given the value 1, but when we try to access the function denoted by a we get an error message because there is no such function. Continuing:
; Evaluation aborted on #<UNDEFINED-FUNCTION A {1002DDC303}>.
CL-USER> (defun a (x) x)
A
CL-USER> (a 'b)
B
CL-USER> a
1
CL-USER> #'a
#<FUNCTION A>
Now we have defined a function named a that simply returns its argument. You can see that when we call a with an argument 'b we get the expected result: (a 'b) --> b. But, then when we evaluate a alone we still get 1. Symbols in Common Lisp are objects that have, among other cells, value cells and function cells. After the above interaction, the symbol a now has 1 in its value cell, and it has the function we have defined in its function cell. When the symbol a is evaluated the value cell is accessed, but when (function a) or #'a is evaluated, the function cell is accessed. You can see above that when #'a is evaluated, the function we defined is returned, and the REPL prints #<FUNCTION A> to show this.
As an aside, I wouldn't recommend using Tutorialspoint to learn Common Lisp. Glancing over the site, right away I see this:
LISP expressions are case-insensitive, cos 45 or COS 45 are same.
This is just wrong. And, Lisp is not written in all-caps. None of this inspires faith. Instead, find a good book. There are some recommendations on the common-lisp tag-info page.
#\
This is to introduce a character.
CL-USER> #\a
#\a
CL-USER> (character 'a)
#\A
CL-USER> (character "a")
#\a
'
This is quote, to quote and not evaluate things and construct object literals.
CL-USER> a
=> error: the variable a is unbound.
CL-USER> 'a
A
CL-USER> (inspect 'a)
The object is a SYMBOL.
0. Name: "A"
1. Package: #<PACKAGE "COMMON-LISP-USER">
2. Value: "unbound"
3. Function: "unbound"
4. Plist: NIL
> q
CL-USER> (equal (list 1 2) (quote (1 2))) ;; aka '(1 2)
T ;; but watch out with object literals constructed with quote, prefer constructor functions.
and #'
This is sharpsign-quote to reference a function.
CL-USER> #'a
=> error: The function COMMON-LISP-USER::A is undefined.
CL-USER> (defun a () (print "hello A"))
A
CL-USER> (a)
"hello A"
"hello A"
CL-USER> #'a
#<FUNCTION A>
CL-USER> (function a)
#<FUNCTION A>
One can ask Lisp to describe the data objects you've mentioned.
If we look at the expressions:
CL-USER 13 > (dolist (object (list '#\a ''a '#'a))
(terpri)
(describe object)
(terpri))
#\a is a CHARACTER
Name "Latin-Small-Letter-A"
Code 97
(QUOTE A) is a LIST
0 QUOTE
1 A
(FUNCTION A) is a LIST
0 FUNCTION
1 A
NIL
If we look at the evaluated expressions:
CL-USER 5 > (dolist (object (list #\a 'a #'a))
(terpri)
(describe object)
(terpri))
#\a is a CHARACTER
Name "Latin-Small-Letter-A"
Code 97
A is a SYMBOL
NAME "A"
VALUE #<unbound value>
FUNCTION #<interpreted function A 422005BD54>
PLIST NIL
PACKAGE #<The COMMON-LISP-USER package, 73/256 internal, 0/4 external>
#<interpreted function A 422005BD54> is a TYPE::INTERPRETED-FUNCTION
CODE (LAMBDA (B)
A)
I have this macro, which rewrites define. If I remove the " ` " backtick it won't work. What is the explanation?
(defmacro define ((name &rest r) body)
`(defun ,name ,r ,body))
A single quote followed by the written representation of a value
will produce that value:
Example:
'(1 x "foo")
will produce a value that prints as (1 x "foo").
Suppose now that I don't want a literal symbol x in the list.
I have a variable x in my program, and I want to insert
the value to which x is bound.
To mark that I want the value of x rather than the symbol x,
I insert a comma before x:
'(1 ,x "foo")
It won't work as-is though - I now get a value that has a literal comma as well as a symbol x. The problem is that quote does not know about the comma convention.
Backtick or backquote knows about the comma-convention, so that will give the correct result:
> `(1 ,x "foo")
(1 3 "foo") ; if the value of x is 3
Read more here: http://www.lispworks.com/documentation/HyperSpec/Body/02_df.htm
The backtick/backquote disables evaluation for every subexpression not preceded by a comma for the list that follows the operator.
From the common lisp cookbook, explanation and a few examples.
I am trying define symbols a and b in following way
a + 1 1 b
2
I am trying to do this by using define-symbol-macro
(define-symbol-macro a '( )
(define-symbol-macro b ') )
but this way is not working.
What Lisp does with source code
Common Lisp is an incredibly flexible language, in part because its source code can be easily represented using the same data structures that are used in the language. The most common form of macro expansion transforms the these structures into other structures. These are the kind of macros that you can define with define-symbol-macro, define-compiler-macro, defmacro, and macrolet. Before any of those kind of macroexpansions can be performed, however, the system first needs to read the source from an input stream (typically a file, or an interactive prompt). That's the reader's responsibility. The reader also is capable of executing some special actions when it encounters certain characters, such ( and '. What you're trying to do probably needs to be happening down at the reader level, if you want to have, e.g., (read-from-string "a + 1 1 b") return the list (+ 1 1), which is what you want if you want (eval (read-from-string "a + 1 1 b")) to return 2. That said, you could also define a special custom language (like loop does) where a and b are treated specially.
Use set-macro-character, not define-symbol-macro
This isn't something that you would do using symbol-macros, but rather with macro characters. You can set macro characters using the aptly named set-macro-character. For instance, in the following, I set the macro character for % to be a function that reads a list, using read-delimited-list that should be terminated by ^. (Using the characters a and b here will prove very difficult, because you won't be able to write things like (set-macro-character ...) afterwards; it would be like writing (set-m(cro-ch(r(cter ...), which is not good.)
CL-USER> (set-macro-character #\% (lambda (stream ignore)
(declare (ignore ignore))
(read-delimited-list #\^ stream)))
T
CL-USER> % + 1 1 ^
2
The related set-syntax-from-char
There's a related function that almost does what you want here, set-syntax-from-char. You can use it to make one character behave like another. For instance, you can make % behave like (
CL-USER> (set-syntax-from-char #\% #\()
T
CL-USER> % + 1 1 )
2
However, since the macro character associated with ( isn't looking for a character that has the same syntax as ), but an actual ) character, you can't simply replace ) with ^ in the same way:
CL-USER> (set-syntax-from-char #\^ #\))
T
CL-USER> % + 1 1 ^
; Evaluation aborted on #<SB-INT:SIMPLE-READER-ERROR "unmatched close parenthesis" {1002C66031}>.
set-syntax-from-char is more useful when there's an existing character that, by itself does something that you want to imitate. For instance, if you wanted to make ! an additional quotation character:
CL-USER> (set-syntax-from-char #\! #\')
T
CL-USER> (list !a !(1 2 3))
(A (1 2 3))
or make % be a comment character, like it is in LaTeX:
CL-USER> (set-syntax-from-char #\% #\;)
T
CL-USER> (list 1 2 % 3 4
5 6)
(1 2 5 6)
But consider why you're doing this at all…
Now, even though you can do all of this, it seems like something that would be utterly surprising to anyone who ran into it. (Perhaps you're entering an obfuscated coding competition? ;)) For the reasons shown above, doing this with commonly used characters such as a and b will also make it very difficult to write any more source code. It's probably a better bet to define an entirely new readtable that does what you want, or even write a new parser. even though (Common) Lisp lets you redefine the language, there are still things that it probably makes sense to leave alone.
A symbol-macro is a symbol that stands for another form. Seems like you want to look at reader macros.
http://clhs.lisp.se/Body/f_set__1.htm
http://dorophone.blogspot.no/2008/03/common-lisp-reader-macros-simple.html
I would second Rainer's comment though, what are you trying to make?
Ok so I love your comment on the reason for this and now I know this is for 'Just because it's lisp' then I am totally on board!
Ok so you are right about lisp being great to use to make new languages because we only have to 'compile' to valid lisp code and it will run. So while we cant use the normal compiler to do the transformation of the symbols 'a and 'b to brackets we can write this ourselves.
Ok so lets get started!
(defun symbol-name-equal (a b)
(and (symbolp a) (symbolp b) (equal (symbol-name a) (symbol-name b))))
(defun find-matching-weird (start-pos open-symbol close-symbol code)
(unless (symbol-name-equal open-symbol (nth start-pos code))
(error "start-pos does not point to a weird open-symbol"))
(let ((nest-index 0))
(loop :for item :in (nthcdr start-pos code)
:for i :from start-pos :do
(cond ((symbol-name-equal item open-symbol) (incf nest-index 1))
((symbol-name-equal item close-symbol) (incf nest-index -1)))
(when (eql nest-index 0)
(return i))
:finally (return nil))))
(defun weird-forms (open-symbol close-symbol body)
(cond ((null body) nil)
((listp body)
(let ((open-pos (position open-symbol body :test #'symbol-name-equal)))
(if open-pos
(let ((close-pos (find-matching-weird open-pos open-symbol close-symbol body)))
(if close-pos
(weird-forms open-symbol close-symbol
`(,#(subseq body 0 open-pos)
(,#(subseq body (1+ open-pos) close-pos))
,#(subseq body (1+ close-pos))))
(error "unmatched weird brackets")))
(if (find close-symbol body :test #'symbol-name-equal)
(error "unmatched weird brackets")
(loop for item in body collect
(weird-forms open-symbol close-symbol item))))))
(t body)))
(defmacro with-weird-forms ((open-symbol close-symbol) &body body)
`(progn
,#(weird-forms open-symbol close-symbol body)))
So there are a few parts to this.
First we have (symbol-name-equal), this is a helper function because we are now using symbols and symbols belong to packages. symbol-name-equal gives us a way of checking if the symbols have the same name ignoring what package they reside in.
Second we have (find-matching-weird). This is a function that takes a list and and index to an opening weird bracket and returns the index to the closing weird bracket. This makes sure we get the correct bracket even with nesting
Next we have (weird-forms). This is the juicy bit and what it does is to recursively walk through the list passed as the 'body' argument and do the following:
If body is an empty list just return it
if body is a list then
find the positions of our open and close symbols.
if only one of them is found then we have unmatched brackets.
if we find both symbols then make a new list with the bit between the start and end positions inside a nested list.
we then call weird forms on this result in case there are more weird-symbol-forms inside.
there are no weird symbols then just loop over the items in the list and call weird-form on them to keep the search going.
OK so that function transforms a list. For example try:
(weird-forms 'a 'b '(1 2 3 a 4 5 b 6 7))
But we want this to be proper lisp code that executes so we need to use a simple macro.
(with-weird-forms) is a macro that takes calls the weird-forms function and puts the result into our source code to be compiled by lisp. So if we have this:
(with-weird-forms (a b)
(+ 1 2 3 a - a + 1 2 3 b 10 5 b 11 23))
Then it macroexpands into:
(PROGN (+ 1 2 3 (- (+ 1 2 3) 10 5) 11 23))
Which is totally valid lisp code, so it will run!
CL-USER> (with-weird-forms (a b)
(+ 1 2 3 a - a + 1 2 3 b 10 5 b 11 23))
31
Finally if you have settled on the 'a' and 'b' brackets you could write another little macro:
(defmacro ab-lang (&rest code)
`(with-weird-forms (a b) ,#code))
Now try this:
(ab-lang a let* a a d 1 b a e a * d 5 b b b a format t "this stupid test gives: ~a" e b b)
Cheers mate, this was great fun to write. Sorry for dismissing the problem earlier on.
This kind of coding is very important as ultimately this is a tiny compiler for our weird language where symbols can be punctuation. Compilers are awesome and no language makes it as effortless to write them as lisp does.
Peace!
I'm learning lisp and have a question about a simple list:
(setq stuff '(one two three (+ 2 2)))
stuff ; prints "one two three (+ 2 2)"
(setq stuff (list `one `two `three (+ 2 2)))
stuff ; prints "one two three 4"
The first setq creates a list "one two three (+ 2 2)". The second list creates "one two three 4". Why does the first list not evaluate the (+ 2 2), but the second one does? I read in the Emacs Lisp intro documentation that when the list is built that it evaluates from the inside out. Why doesn't the first list evaluate the addition before adding it to the list?
This is elisp in emacs 24.
' is not equivalent to list, it's shorthand for quote. You're really doing this:
(setq stuff (quote (one two three (+ 2 2))))
The argument to quote is the expression (one two three (+ 2 2)).
From http://www.gnu.org/software/emacs/manual/html_node/elisp/Quoting.html: "The special form quote returns its single argument, as written, without evaluating it".
Looks like you're coming to grips with the evaluation semantics of Lisp, so keep playing around!
You can think of quote as suppressing evaluation of its argument. This allows you to write expressions that you can manipulate or pass around. It is also used to write data structures that should not be evaluated as function calls.
Data structures:
'(1 2 3) ; => '(1 2 3)
(1 2 3) ; => Lisp error: (invalid-function 1)
;; The Lisp reader sees the number 1 in the function position and tries to call it, signalling an error.
Syntax transformations:
(setq x '(string-to-int "123"))
(setf (car x) 'string-to-list)
x ; => '(string-to-list "123")
Delayed evaluation:
(setq x '(message "Hello World")) ; => '(message "Hello World")
(eval x) ; => "Hello World"
There is a closely related special operator called syntax quote, written using the backtick. It allows you to evaluate individual forms in a quoted expression using the comma ( , ) operator. It is like quote with an escape hatch.
`(1 2 (+ 3 4)) ; => '(1 2 (+ 3 4))
`(1 2 ,(+ 3 4)) ; => '(1 2 7) ;; Note the comma!
Syntax quote also permits list splicing using the ,# syntax:
`(1 2 ,#(+ 3 4)) ; => '(1 2 + 3 4)
As you can see, it splices the subsequent expression into the containing one. You probably won't see it all that often until you start writing macros.
list on the other hand is a simple function. It evaluates its arguments, then returns a new data structure containing these items.
(list 1 2 (+ 3 4)) ; => '(1 2 7)
It seems one is not supposed to quote KEYMAP when using define-key.
(define-key org-remember-mode-map "\C-c\C-r" 'org-remember-kill)
I'm confused because I think that all arguments of a function that is not quoted are evaluated, and according to the help, define-key is a function, not a macro. I don't see why the value of KEYMAP can be modified after a call of define-key.
(defun increment-value (a)
(setq a (+ 1 a)))
(setq my-num 10)
(increment-value my-num)
my-num ; ===> 10
Update: The answers explain everything, but for those still confused, let me clear up with more examples.
My increment-value example above is equivalent to this:
(let ((n 0))
(print n) ; prints 0
(let ((a n))
(setq a (+ 1 a))
(print a) ; prints 1
)
(print n) ; prints 0
)
What's going on above is, I think, similar to what's going on in this some-map example:
(let ((some-map '(1 2)))
(print some-map) ; prints (1 2)
(let ((a some-map))
(setq a (list 4 (second a)))
(print a) ; prints (4 2)
)
(print some-map) ; prints (1 2)
)
What's going on in define-key is similar to this second some-map example:
(let ((some-map '(1 2)))
(print some-map) ; prints (1 2)
(let ((a some-map))
(setcar a 4)
(print a) ; prints (4 2)
)
(print some-map) ; prints (4 2)
)
Now read the answers again with these three examples in mind and you will get it. Read also http://www.emacswiki.org/emacs/ListModification
You aren't actually changing what 'org-remember-map is (a pointer to a particular list structure), you are modifying the actual structure. Read this info page for details on modifying lists.
Specificially, if you take a look at the documentation for 'make-keymap:
(make-keymap &optional string)
Construct and return a new keymap, of
the form (keymap CHARTABLE . ALIST).
CHARTABLE is a char-table that holds
the bindings for all characters
without modifiers. All entries in it
are initially nil, meaning "command
undefined". ALIST is an assoc-list
which holds bindings for function
keys, mouse events, and any other
things that appear in the input
stream. Initially, ALIST is nil.
You'll see that keymap is a list with three elements. Let me draw that for you (yay M-x artist-mode):
org-remember-map
|
|
v
+----+----+ +----+----+
| | | --+--->+ / | \ |
+-+--+----+ +-/--+--\-+
| | |
v v v
keymap CHARTABLE ALIST
So, the value of the 'org-remember-map is something like the above structure, and when you define a key, what you are doing is changing what is pointed to in the ALIST blob part of the structure.
you're confusing value and name-value mapping.
in your increment-value function, you're not changing a's value as much as changing the mapping of the name a to a new value.
Fundamentally, there is no way to change the value of 10. 10 is 10!
But in the first case, you can either modify the mapping of the name org-remember-mode-map to a fully different map (set a new value), or you can alter the map pointed by that name (its current value). This is what define-key does.
Illustration:
(setq a '(1 2)) -> (1 2)
(setcar a 4) -> 4
a -> (4 2)
Everything you write is completely correct. The thing you are missing is that lists (keymaps are represented as lists) are not values themselves, but containers of values. Thus, you can pass a list to a function and have that function change the values of the list, but the list you have is still the same list.
All the details are in the Cons Cell Type section of the elisp manual.