I want to initialize acc as 0. I want to add the length of each element of lst. I understand this is not the easiest way to do it, but I simplified my real code for this example. How exactly can I accumulate the total length and assign it to acc.
Also, I am trying to avoid using set! or other ! commands.
(define (total-length-list lst)
(define acc 0)
(for/list ([i lst])
(cond [(= 0 (length i)) (+ acc 0)]
[(= 1 (length i)) (+ acc 1)]
[(= 2 (length i)) (+ acc 2)]))
acc)
From your description I would implement it with apply and map.
;; total-length-list : [Listof [Listof Any]] -> Natural
(define (total-length-list lst)
(apply + (map length lst)))
If you want to use a loop, then for/sum is good.
;; total-length-list : [Listof [Listof Any]] -> Natural
(define (total-length-list lst)
(for/sum ([i lst])
(length i)))
If you want to use an accumulator, for/fold can do that.
;; total-length-list : [Listof [Listof Any]] -> Natural
(define (total-length-list lst)
(for/fold ([acc 0]) ([i lst])
(+ acc (length i))))
And if you still want that cond for some reason, you can put that inside the for/fold, but make sure to have an else case that returns the accumulator unchanged.
;; total-length-list : [Listof [Listof Any]] -> Natural
(define (total-length-list lst)
(for/fold ([acc 0]) ([i lst])
(cond [(= 0 (length i)) (+ acc 0)]
[(= 1 (length i)) (+ acc 1)]
[(= 2 (length i)) (+ acc 2)]
[else acc])))
If you leave out the [else acc] in the cond you might get an error about #<void>.
But simpler is better, so I would recommend either using apply with map, or using for/sum, no accumulators or conditionals necessary.
From an imperative programmer's point of view,
(for/fold ([acc init]) ([elem lst])
body)
returns the same value as
(define acc init)
(for ([elem lst])
(set! acc body))
acc
However, for/fold does it without any mutation/set! necessary.
Related
I am new in Lisp and i need some help.
I need to simplify next expressions:
from (+ (+ A B) C) to (+ A B C)
and from (- (- A B) C) to (- A B C).
If you could help me with one of them I'll understand how i need to do this to the next one.
Thanks a lot.
Assuming you have an input that matches this pattern, (+ e1 ... en), you want to recursively simplify all e1 to en, which gives you s1, ..., sn, and then extract all the si that start with a + to move their arguments one level up, to the simplified expression you are building.
An expression e matches the above pattern if (and (consp e) (eq '+ (car e))).
Then, all the ei are just given by the list that is (cdr e).
Consider the (+) case, how could you simplify it?
To apply a function f to a list of values, call (mapcar #'f list).
To split a list into two lists, based on a predicate p, you might use a loop:
(let ((sat nil) (unsat nil))
(dolist (x list (values sat unsat))
(if (funcall predicate x)
(push x sat)
(push x unsat))))
There is a purely functional way to write this, can you figure it out?
Here is a trivial simplifier written in Racket, with an implementation of a rather mindless simplifier for +. Note that this is not intended as anything serious: it's just what I typed in when I was thinking about this question.
This uses Racket's pattern matching, probably in a naïve way, to do some of the work.
(define/match (simplify expression)
;; simplifier driver
(((cons op args))
;; An operator with some arguments
;; Note that this assumes that the arguments to operators are always
;; expressions to simplify, so the recursive level can be here
(simplify-op op (map simplify args)))
((expr)
;; anything else
expr))
(define op-table (make-hash))
(define-syntax-rule (define-op-simplifier (op args) form ...)
;; Define a simplifier for op with arguments args
(hash-set! op-table 'op (λ (args) form ...)))
(define (simplify-op op args)
;; Note the slightly arcane fallback: you need to wrap it in a thunk
;; so hash-ref does not try to call it.
((hash-ref op-table op (thunk (λ (args) (cons op args)))) args))
(define-op-simplifier (+ exprs)
;; Simplify (+ ...) by flattening + in its arguments
(let loop ([ftail exprs]
[results '()])
(if (null? ftail)
`(+ ,#(reverse results))
(loop (rest ftail)
(match (first ftail)
[(cons '+ addends)
(append (reverse addends) results)]
[expr (cons expr results)])))))
It is possible to be more aggressive than this. For instance we can coalesce runs of literal numbers, so we can simplify (+ 1 2 3 a 4) to
(+ 6 a 4) (note it is not safe in general to further simplify this to (+ 10 a) unless all arithmetic is exact). Here is a function which does this coalescing for for + and *:
(define (coalesce-literal-numbers f elts)
;; coalesce runs of literal numbers for an operator f.
;; This relies on the fact that (f) returns a good identity for f
;; (so in particular it returns an exact number). Thisis true for Racket
;; and CL and I think any Lisp worth its salt.
;;
;; Note that it's important here that (eqv? 1 1.0) is false.
;;;
(define id (f))
(let loop ([tail elts]
[accum id]
[results '()])
(cond [(null? tail)
(if (not (eqv? accum id))
(reverse (cons accum results))
(reverse results))]
[(number? (first tail))
(loop (rest tail)
(f accum (first tail))
results)]
[(eqv? accum id)
(loop (rest tail)
accum
(cons (first tail) results))]
[else
(loop (rest tail)
id
(list* (first tail) accum results))])))
And here is a modified simplifier for + which uses this. As well as coalescing it notices that (+ x) can be simplified to x.
(define-op-simplifier (+ exprs)
;; Simplify (+ ...) by flattening + in its arguments
(let loop ([ftail exprs]
[results '()])
(if (null? ftail)
(let ([coalesced (coalesce-literal-numbers + (reverse results))])
(match coalesced
[(list something)
something]
[exprs
`(+ ,#exprs)]))
(loop (rest ftail)
(match (first ftail)
[(cons '+ addends)
(append (reverse addends) results)]
[expr (cons expr results)])))))
Here is an example of using this enhanced simplifier:
> (simplify 'a)
'a
> (simplify 1)
1
> (simplify '(+ 1 a))
'(+ 1 a)
> (simplify '(+ a (+ b c)))
'(+ a b c)
> (simplify '(+ 1 (+ 3 c) 4))
'(+ 4 c 4)
> (simplify '(+ 1 2 3))
6
For yet more value you can notice that the simplifier for * is really the same, and change things to this:
(define (simplify-arith-op op fn exprs)
(let loop ([ftail exprs]
[results '()])
(if (null? ftail)
(let ([coalesced (coalesce-literal-numbers fn (reverse results))])
(match coalesced
[(list something)
something]
['()
(fn)]
[exprs
`(,op ,#exprs)]))
(loop (rest ftail)
(match (first ftail)
[(cons the-op addends)
#:when (eqv? the-op op)
(append (reverse addends) results)]
[expr (cons expr results)])))))
(define-op-simplifier (+ exprs)
(simplify-arith-op '+ + exprs))
(define-op-simplifier (* exprs)
(simplify-arith-op '* * exprs))
And now
(simplify '(+ a (* 1 2 (+ 4 5)) (* 3 4) 6 (* b)))
'(+ a 36 b)
Which is reasonably neat.
You can go further than this, For instance when coalescing numbers for an operator you can simply elide sequences of the identity for that operator: (* 1 1 a 1 1 b) can be simplified to (* a b), not (* 1 a 1 b). It may seem silly to do that: who would ever write such an expression, but they can quite easily occur when simplifying complicated expressions.
There is a gist of an elaborated version of this code. It may still be buggy.
I want to show the result of my function as a list not as a number.
My result is:
(define lst (list ))
(define (num->base n b)
(if (zero? n)
(append lst (list 0))
(append lst (list (+ (* 10 (num->base (quotient n b) b)) (modulo n b))))))
The next error appears:
expected: number?
given: '(0)
argument position: 2nd
other arguments...:
10
I think you have to rethink this problem. Appending results to a global variable is definitely not the way to go, let's try a different approach via tail recursion:
(define (num->base n b)
(let loop ((n n) (acc '()))
(if (< n b)
(cons n acc)
(loop (quotient n b)
(cons (modulo n b) acc)))))
It works as expected:
(num->base 12345 10)
=> '(1 2 3 4 5)
This is trivial implement of course, but I feel there is certainly something built in to Racket that does this. Am I correct in that intuition, and if so, what is the function?
Strangely, there isn't a built-in procedure in Racket for finding the 0-based index of an element in a list (the opposite procedure does exist, it's called list-ref). However, it's not hard to implement efficiently:
(define (index-of lst ele)
(let loop ((lst lst)
(idx 0))
(cond ((empty? lst) #f)
((equal? (first lst) ele) idx)
(else (loop (rest lst) (add1 idx))))))
But there is a similar procedure in srfi/1, it's called list-index and you can get the desired effect by passing the right parameters:
(require srfi/1)
(list-index (curry equal? 3) '(1 2 3 4 5))
=> 2
(list-index (curry equal? 6) '(1 2 3 4 5))
=> #f
UPDATE
As of Racket 6.7, index-of is now part of the standard library. Enjoy!
Here's a very simple implementation:
(define (index-of l x)
(for/or ([y l] [i (in-naturals)] #:when (equal? x y)) i))
And yes, something like this should be added to the standard library, but it's just a little tricky to do so nobody got there yet.
Note, however, that it's a feature that is very rarely useful -- since lists are usually taken as a sequence that is deconstructed using only the first/rest idiom rather than directly accessing elements. More than that, if you have a use for it and you're a newbie, then my first guess will be that you're misusing lists. Given that, the addition of such a function is likely to trip such newbies by making it more accessible. (But it will still be added, eventually.)
One can also use a built-in function 'member' which gives a sublist starting with the required item or #f if item does not exist in the list. Following compares the lengths of original list and the sublist returned by member:
(define (indexof n l)
(define sl (member n l))
(if sl
(- (length l)
(length sl))
#f))
For many situations, one may want indexes of all occurrences of item in the list. One can get a list of all indexes as follows:
(define (indexes_of1 x l)
(let loop ((l l)
(ol '())
(idx 0))
(cond
[(empty? l) (reverse ol)]
[(equal? (first l) x)
(loop (rest l)
(cons idx ol)
(add1 idx))]
[else
(loop (rest l)
ol
(add1 idx))])))
For/list can also be used for this:
(define (indexes_of2 x l)
(for/list ((i l)
(n (in-naturals))
#:when (equal? i x))
n))
Testing:
(indexes_of1 'a '(a b c a d e a f g))
(indexes_of2 'a '(a b c a d e a f g))
Output:
'(0 3 6)
'(0 3 6)
I've a question, how to return a list without the nth element of a given list? E.g., given list: (1 2 3 2 4 6), and given n = 4, in this case the return list should be (1 2 3 4 6).
A simple recursive solution:
(defun remove-nth (n list)
(declare
(type (integer 0) n)
(type list list))
(if (or (zerop n) (null list))
(cdr list)
(cons (car list) (remove-nth (1- n) (cdr list)))))
This will share the common tail, except in the case where the list has n or more elements, in which case it returns a new list with the same elements as the provided one.
Using remove-if:
(defun foo (n list)
(remove-if (constantly t) list :start (1- n) :count 1))
butlast/nthcdr solution (corrected):
(defun foo (n list)
(append (butlast list (1+ (- (length list) n))) (nthcdr n list)))
Or, maybe more readable:
(defun foo (n list)
(append (subseq list 0 (1- n)) (nthcdr n list)))
Using loop:
(defun foo (n list)
(loop for elt in list
for i from 1
unless (= i n) collect elt))
Here's an interesting approach. It replaces the nth element of a list with a new symbol and then removes that symbol from the list. I haven't considered how (in)efficient it is though!
(defun remove-nth (n list)
(remove (setf (nth n list) (gensym)) list))
(loop :for i :in '(1 2 3 2 4 6) ; the list
:for idx :from 0
:unless (= 3 idx) :collect i) ; except idx=3
;; => (1 2 3 4 6)
loop macro can be very useful and effective in terms of generated code by lisp compiler and macro expander.
Test run and apply macroexpand above code snippet.
A slightly more general function:
(defun remove-by-position (pred lst)
(labels ((walk-list (pred lst idx)
(if (null lst)
lst
(if (funcall pred idx)
(walk-list pred (cdr lst) (1+ idx))
(cons (car lst) (walk-list pred (cdr lst) (1+ idx)))))))
(walk-list pred lst 1)))
Which we use to implement desired remove-nth:
(defun remove-nth (n list)
(remove-by-position (lambda (i) (= i n)) list))
And the invocation:
(remove-nth 4 '(1 2 3 2 4 6))
Edit: Applied remarks from Samuel's comment.
A destructive version, the original list will be modified (except when n < 1),
(defun remove-nth (n lst)
(if (< n 1) (cdr lst)
(let* ((p (nthcdr (1- n) lst))
(right (cddr p)))
(when (consp p)
(setcdr p nil))
(nconc lst right))))
That's elisp but I think those are standard lispy functions.
For all you haskellers out there, there is no need to twist your brains :)
(defun take (n l)
(subseq l 0 (min n (length l))))
(defun drop (n l)
(subseq l n))
(defun remove-nth (n l)
(append (take (- n 1) l)
(drop n l)))
My horrible elisp solution:
(defun without-nth (list n)
(defun accum-if (list accum n)
(if (not list)
accum
(accum-if (cdr list) (if (eq n 0) accum (cons (car list) accum))
(- n 1))))
(reverse (accum-if list '() n)))
(without-nth '(1 2 3) 1)
Should be easily portable to Common Lisp.
A much simpler solution will be as follows.
(defun remove-nth (n lst)
(append (subseq lst 0 (- n 1)) (subseq lst n (length lst)))
)
Given a list, how would I select a new list, containing a slice of the original list (Given offset and number of elements) ?
EDIT:
Good suggestions so far. Isn't there something specified in one of the SRFI's? This appears to be a very fundamental thing, so I'm surprised that I need to implement it in user-land.
Strangely, slice is not provided with SRFI-1 but you can make it shorter by using SRFI-1's take and drop:
(define (slice l offset n)
(take (drop l offset) n))
I thought that one of the extensions I've used with Scheme, like the PLT Scheme library or Swindle, would have this built-in, but it doesn't seem to be the case. It's not even defined in the new R6RS libraries.
The following code will do what you want:
(define get-n-items
(lambda (lst num)
(if (> num 0)
(cons (car lst) (get-n-items (cdr lst) (- num 1)))
'()))) ;'
(define slice
(lambda (lst start count)
(if (> start 1)
(slice (cdr lst) (- start 1) count)
(get-n-items lst count))))
Example:
> (define l '(2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9)) ;'
()
> l
(2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9)
> (slice l 2 4)
(3 4 5 6)
>
You can try this function:
subseq sequence start &optional end
The start parameter is your offset. The end parameter can be easily turned into the number of elements to grab by simply adding start + number-of-elements.
A small bonus is that subseq works on all sequences, this includes not only lists but also string and vectors.
Edit: It seems that not all lisp implementations have subseq, though it will do the job just fine if you have it.
(define (sublist list start number)
(cond ((> start 0) (sublist (cdr list) (- start 1) number))
((> number 0) (cons (car list)
(sublist (cdr list) 0 (- number 1))))
(else '())))
Try something like this:
(define (slice l offset length)
(if (null? l)
l
(if (> offset 0)
(slice (cdr l) (- offset 1) length)
(if (> length 0)
(cons (car l) (slice (cdr l) 0 (- length 1)))
'()))))
Here's my implementation of slice that uses a proper tail call
(define (slice a b xs (ys null))
(cond ((> a 0) (slice (- a 1) b (cdr xs) ys))
((> b 0) (slice a (- b 1) (cdr xs) (cons (car xs) ys)))
(else (reverse ys))))
(slice 0 3 '(A B C D E F G)) ;=> '(A B C)
(slice 2 4 '(A B C D E F G)) ;=> '(C D E F)