I need to make a named function, which makes a new list from the 3rd item from three master lists. I made this code
(defun func (nth n))
(lambda (l1 l2 l3) '(H G (U J) (T R)) '(2 1 (+ 4 5)) '(TYPE CHAR REAL (H G)))
(write (func (lambda (l1 l2 l3) '(H G (U J) (T R)) '(2 1 (+ 4 5)) '(TYPE CHAR REAL (H G))) 2))
but it returns NIL. What do I do wrong?
You need to indent and format your code. Otherwise it's an unreadable blob of characters.
Here is what you have:
Your function func takes two arguments and does nothing. It always returns NIL.
Then there is a lambda expression which takes three arguments. It uses none of them. It has three body expressions. The first two are not used and the third is being returned.
The third expression calls the function func, which always returns NIL. WRITE then prints this NIL.
Your code, but formatted readably for humans, looks like this:
(defun func (nth n)
; no functionality, does nothing and returns NIL
)
(lambda (l1 l2 l3)
'(H G (U J) (T R))
'(2 1 (+ 4 5))
'(TYPE CHAR REAL (H G)))
(write (func (lambda (l1 l2 l3)
'(H G (U J) (T R))
'(2 1 (+ 4 5))
'(TYPE CHAR REAL (H G)))
2))
Hint: you would need to write actual functionality.
Related
is it possible in C-Lisp to collect the results of a map into an array with 2 dimensions? how would I reference this array in the function?
I've tried things like,
(map 'Array'(3 3) #'somefunction sequence)
or
(map '(simple-array T (3 3)) #'somefunction sequence)
and was not successful.
Of course the sequence i'm starting from have the same number of total elements of the result array i wish to obtain
A good way to do this is to use displaced arrays and map-into. Here's an over-simple example:
(defun map-array (f a &rest make-array-kws &key &allow-other-keys)
;; Map F over A, which can be any array, returning a new array with
;; the same shape as A. Keyword arguments get passwd to MAKE-ARRAY
;; of the result array. This may not handle things like fill
;; pointers well or at all.
(let ((r (apply #'make-array (array-dimensions a)
make-array-kws)))
(map-into
(make-array (array-total-size r)
:element-type (array-element-type r)
:displaced-to r)
f
(make-array (array-total-size a)
:element-type (array-element-type a)
:displaced-to a))
r))
No. According to the hyperspec (http://www.lispworks.com/documentation/lw50/CLHS/Body/f_map.htm#map), the result type specifier has to be a sequence type. Multi-dimensional arrays are not sequence types. Of course, you could write a function to do what you want, but it cannot be directly accomplished with the map function.
Here's how you might make your own:
(defun map-to-array (fn sequence w h &optional (type t))
(assert (<= (length sequence) (* w h)) (w h) "Result array too small.")
(let ((result (make-array (list w h)
:element-type type))
(x -1)
(y 0))
(map nil
(lambda (e)
(incf x)
(when (= x w)
(setf x 0)
(incf y))
(setf (aref result x y)
(funcall fn e)))
sequence)
result))
I'm trying to make a for loop that iterates over a list of numbers and prints out every 3rd number.
Edit: I've only figured out how to use the for loop but I'm not entirely sure if there's a specific function I can use to only show every 3rd number. I feel like I might be on the right path when using car/cdr function except I'm getting an error
rest: contract violation
expected: (and/c list? (not/c empty?))
given: 0
My code:
(for/list ([x (in-range 20)] #:when (car(cdr(cdr x)))) (displayln x))
I'm trying to make a for loop that iterates over a list of numbers and prints out every 3rd number.
Typically it is more useful to create a new list with the desired values, and then print those values, or pass them to a function, or do whatever else may be needed. for/list does indeed return a list, and this is one reason for problems encountered by OP example code. (Other problems in OP code include that x is a number with [x (in-range 20)], so (cdr x) is not defined).
A possible solution would be to recurse over the input list, using take to grab the next three values, keeping the third, and using drop to reduce the input list:
;; Recurse using `take` and `drop`:
(define (every-3rd-1 lst)
(if (< (length lst) 3)
'()
(cons (third (take lst 3))
(every-3rd-1 (drop lst 3)))))
Another option would be to recurse on the input list using an auxiliary counter; starting from 1, only keep the values from the input list when the counter is a multiple of 3:
;; Recurse using an auxilliary counter:
(define (every-3rd-2 lst)
(define (every-3rd-helper lst counter)
(cond [(null? lst)
'()]
[(zero? (remainder counter 3))
(cons (first lst) (every-3rd-helper (rest lst) (add1 counter)))]
[else (every-3rd-helper (rest lst) (add1 counter))]))
(every-3rd-helper lst 1))
Yet another possibility would be to use for/list to build a list; here i is bound to values from the input list, and counter is bound to values from a list of counting numbers:
;; Use `for/list` to build a list:
(define (every-3rd-3 lst)
(for/list ([i lst]
[counter (range 1 (add1 (length lst)))]
#:when (zero? (remainder counter 3)))
i))
This function (or any of them, for that matter) could be usefully generalized to keep every nth element:
;; Generalize to `every-nth`:
(define (every-nth n lst)
(for/list ([i lst]
[counter (range 1 (add1 (length lst)))]
#:when (zero? (remainder counter n)))
i))
Finally, map could be used to create a list containing every nth element by mapping over a range of every nth index into the list:
;; Use `map` and `range`:
(define (every-nth-map n lst)
(map (lambda (x) (list-ref lst x)) (range (sub1 n) (length lst) n)))
If what OP really requires is simply to print every third value, rather than to create a list of every third value, perhaps the code above can provide useful materials allowing OP to come to a satisfactory conclusion. But, each of these functions can be used to print results as OP desires, as well:
scratch.rkt> (for ([x (every-3rd-1 '(a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p))])
(displayln x))
c
f
i
l
o
scratch.rkt> (for ([x (every-3rd-2 '(a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p))])
(displayln x))
c
f
i
l
o
scratch.rkt> (for ([x (every-3rd-3 '(a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p))])
(displayln x))
c
f
i
l
o
scratch.rkt> (for ([x (every-nth 3 '(a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p))])
(displayln x))
c
f
i
l
o
scratch.rkt> (for ([x (every-nth-map 3 '(a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p))])
(displayln x))
c
f
i
l
o
Here is a template:
(for ([x (in-list xs)]
[i (in-naturals]
#:when some-condition-involving-i)
(displayln x))
(defun foo (in i out)
(if (>= i 0)
(progn
(append (list (intern (string (elt in i)))) out)
(print output)
(foo in (- i 1) out )
)
(out)
)
)
(print (foo "abcd" (- (length "abcd") 1) (list)))
I am trying to return this string as (a b c d). But it does return nil as output. What do I do wrong here? Thanks
I don’t know what this has to do with appending. I think your desired output is also weird and you shouldn’t do what you’re doing. The right object for a character is a character not a symbol. Nevertheless, a good way to get the list (a b c d) is as follows:
CL-USER> '(a b c d)
Interning symbols at runtime is weird so maybe you would like this:
(defconstant +alphabet+ #(a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r s t u v w x y z))
(defun foo (seq)
(map 'list
(lambda (char)
(let ((index (- (char-code char) (char-code #\a))))
(if (< -1 index (length +alphabet+))
(svref +alphabet+ index)
(error "not in alphabet: ~c" char))))
seq))
You have just some minor mistakes. First, we need to get rid of output and (output); these bear no relation to the code. It seems you were working with a variable called output and then renamed it to out without fixing all the code. Moreover, (output) is a function call; it expects a function called output to exist.
Secondly, the result of append must be captured somehow; in the progn you're just discarding it. Here is a working version:
(defun foo (in i out)
(if (>= i 0)
(foo in (1- i) (cons (intern (string (elt in i))) out))
out))
Note also that instead of your (append (list X) Y), I'm using the more efficient and idiomatic (cons X Y). The result of this cons operation has to be passed to foo. The out argument is our accumulator that is threaded through the tail recursion; it holds how much of the list we have so far.
I.e. we can't have (progn <make-new-list> (foo ... <old-list>)); that just creates the new list and throws it away, and then just passes the old list to the recursive call. Since the old list initially comes as nil, we just keep passing along this nil and when the index hits zero, that's what pops out. We need (foo .... <make-new-list>), which is what I've done.
Tests:
[1]> (foo "" -1 nil)
NIL
[2]> (foo "a" 0 nil)
(|a|)
[3]> (foo "ab" 1 nil)
(|a| |b|)
[4]> (foo "abcd" 3 nil)
(|a| |b| |c| |d|)
[5]> (foo "abcd" 3 '(x y z))
(|a| |b| |c| |d| X Y Z)
Lastly, if you want the (|a| |b| |c| |d|) symbols to appear as (a b c d), you have to fiddle withreadtable-case.
Of course:
[6]> (foo "ABCD" 3 nil)
(A B C D)
I am confused about the difference between '(()) and (cons null null) in scheme.
The code below show that b and c are completely the same thing.
(define (dup2 x)
(let ((d '(())))
(set-car! d (car x))
(set-cdr! d (cdr x))
d))
(define a '(1 2))
(define b (dup2 a))
(define c (dup2 a))
(set-car! b 2)
> c ;; --> (2 2)
However, when I used dup instead of dup2:
(define (dup x)
(let ((d (cons null null)))
(set-car! d (car x))
(set-cdr! d (cdr x))
d))
(define a '(1 2))
(define b (dup a))
(define c (dup a))
(set-car! b 2)
> c ;; --> (1 2)
Variable b and c are different. I have done some experiments, but I haven't understand yet.
The value of d in the first implementation is literal data, and is modified with undefined consequences. To highlight what's happening, consider the following code:
(define (incorrect-list-null-and-x x)
(let ((l '(()))) ; a list of the form (() . ())
(set-cdr! l (cons x (cdr l))) ; (cdr l) is (), so (cons x (cdr l)) should be (x . ()) == (x), right?
; and now l should be (() . (x . ())) == (() x), right?
l))
The expected result is that (incorrect-list-null-and-x n) should return a list of the form (() n), and it does the first time, but successive calls are still accessing the same data:
(incorrect-list-null-and-x 1) ;=> (() 1)
(incorrect-list-null-and-x 2) ;=> (() 2 1)
(incorrect-list-null-and-x 3) ;=> (() 3 2 1)
(incorrect-list-null-and-x 4) ;=> (() 4 3 2 1)
The same problem manifests itself a bit differently in your dup2. Every value returned from dup2 is actually the same pair:
(let* ((x (dup2 (cons 1 2)))
(y (dup2 (cons 3 4))))
(display x)
(display y))
outputs:
(3 . 4)(3 . 4)
because the call (dup2 (cons 3 4)) modifies the same structure that was previously returned by (dup2 (cons 1 2)).
Data literals, like '(()), are meant to be read-only, and modifying it using set-car! or set-cdr! has undefined behaviour. For predictable behaviour, use the (cons '() '()) version if you want to use set-car! or set-cdr! on it.
In particular, cons creates a new cons cell, whereas a data literal usually won't.
Still, for the purposes of implementing dup, why are you using set-car! and set-cdr! anyway? Just use cons directly:
(define (dup x)
(cons (car x) (cdr x)))
In your first code snippet you use (d '(())) which ends up binding a literal to d. You then modify the literal which is generally undefined. In your second code snippet you use (d (cons null null)) which binds d to a newly created 'cons cell' which you then modify. There is no problem modifying that.
Note: you've not defined null. Perhaps you meant '()?
(define (repeated f n)
if (= n 0)
f
((compose repeated f) (lambda (x) (- n 1))))
I wrote this function, but how would I express this more clearly, using simple recursion with repeated?
I'm sorry, I forgot to define my compose function.
(define (compose f g) (lambda (x) (f (g x))))
And the function takes as inputs a procedure that computes f and a positive integer n and returns the procedure that computes the nth repeated application of f.
I'm assuming that (repeated f 3) should return a function g(x)=f(f(f(x))). If that's not what you want, please clarify. Anyways, that definition of repeated can be written as follows:
(define (repeated f n)
(lambda (x)
(if (= n 0)
x
((repeated f (- n 1)) (f x)))))
(define (square x)
(* x x))
(define y (repeated square 3))
(y 2) ; returns 256, which is (square (square (square 2)))
(define (repeated f n)
(lambda (x)
(let recur ((x x) (n n))
(if (= n 0)
args
(recur (f x) (sub1 n))))))
Write the function the way you normally would, except that the arguments are passed in two stages. It might be even clearer to define repeated this way:
(define repeated (lambda (f n) (lambda (x)
(define (recur x n)
(if (= n 0)
x
(recur (f x) (sub1 n))))
(recur x n))))
You don't have to use a 'let-loop' this way, and the lambdas make it obvious that you expect your arguments in two stages.
(Note:recur is not built in to Scheme as it is in Clojure, I just like the name)
> (define foonly (repeat sub1 10))
> (foonly 11)
1
> (foonly 9)
-1
The cool functional feature you want here is currying, not composition. Here's the Haskell with implicit currying:
repeated _ 0 x = x
repeated f n x = repeated f (pred n) (f x)
I hope this isn't a homework problem.
What is your function trying to do, just out of curiosity? Is it to run f, n times? If so, you can do this.
(define (repeated f n)
(for-each (lambda (i) (f)) (iota n)))