Related
Exercise 6.36 of David Touretzky's Common Lisp book asks for a function swap-first-last that swaps the first and last argument of any list. I feel really stupid right now, but I am unable to solve this with destructuring-bind.
How can I do what in Python would be first, *rest, last = (1,2,3,4) (iterable unpacking) in Common Lisp/with destructuring-bind?
After all trying out, and with some comments by #WillNess (thanks!) I came up with this idea:
macro bind
The idea is trying to subdivide the list and use the &rest functionality of the lambda list in destructuring-bind, however, using the shorter . notation - and using butlast and the car-last combination.
(defmacro bind ((first _rest last) expr &body body)
`(destructuring-bind ((,first . ,_rest) ,last)
`(,,(butlast expr) ,,(car (last expr)))
,#body)))
usage:
(bind (f _rest l) (list 1 2 3 4)
(list f _rest l))
;; => (1 (2 3) 4)
My original answer
There is no so elegant possibility like for Python.
destructuring-bind cannot bind more differently than lambda can: lambda-lists take only the entire rest as &rest <name-for-rest>.
No way there to take the last element out directly.
(Of course, no way, except you write a macro extra for this kind of problems).
(destructuring-bind (first &rest rest) (list 1 2 3 4)
(let* ((last (car (last rest)))
(*rest (butlast rest)))
(list first *rest last)))
;;=> (1 (2 3) 4)
;; or:
(destructuring-bind (first . rest) (list 1 2 3 4)
(let* ((last (car (last rest)))
(*rest (butlast rest)))
(list first *rest last)))
But of course, you are in lisp, you could theoretically write macros to
destructuring-bind in a more sophisticated way ...
But then, destructuring-bind does not lead to much more clarity than:
(defparameter *l* '(1 2 3 4))
(let ((first (car *l*))
(*rest (butlast (cdr *l*)))
(last (car (last *l*))))
(list first *rest last))
;;=> (1 (2 3) 4)
The macro first-*rest-last
To show you, how quickly in common lisp such a macro is generated:
;; first-*rest-last is a macro which destructures list for their
;; first, middle and last elements.
;; I guess more skilled lisp programmers could write you
;; kind of a more generalized `destructuring-bind` with some extra syntax ;; that can distinguish the middle pieces like `*rest` from `&rest rest`.
;; But I don't know reader macros that well yet.
(ql:quickload :alexandria)
(defmacro first-*rest-last ((first *rest last) expr &body body)
(let ((rest))
(alexandria:once-only (rest)
`(destructuring-bind (,first . ,rest) ,expr
(destructuring-bind (,last . ,*rest) (nreverse ,rest)
(let ((,*rest (nreverse ,*rest)))
,#body))))))
;; or an easier definition:
(defmacro first-*rest-last ((first *rest last) expr &body body)
(alexandria:once-only (expr)
`(let ((,first (car ,expr))
(,*rest (butlast (cdr ,expr)))
(,last (car (last ,expr))))
,#body))))
Usage:
;; you give in the list after `first-*rest-last` the name of the variables
;; which should capture the first, middle and last part of your list-giving expression
;; which you then can use in the body.
(first-*rest-last (a b c) (list 1 2 3 4)
(list a b c))
;;=> (1 (2 3) 4)
This macro allows you to give any name for the first, *rest and last part of the list, which you can process further in the body of the macro,
hopefully contributing to more readability in your code.
contextualization: I've been doing a university project in which I have to write a parser for regular expressions and build the corresponding epsilon-NFA. I have to do this in Prolog and Lisp.
I don't know if questions like this are allowed, if not I apologize.
I heard some of my classmates talking about how they used the function gensym for that, I asked them what it did and even checked up online but I literally can't understand what this function does neither why or when is best to use it.
In particular, I'm more intrested in what it does in Lisp.
Thank you all.
GENSYM creates unique symbols. Each call creates a new symbol. The symbol usually has a name which includes a number, which is counted up. The name is also unique (the symbol itself is already unique) with a number, so that a human reader can identify different uninterned symbols in the source code.
CL-USER 39 > (gensym)
#:G1083
CL-USER 40 > (gensym)
#:G1084
CL-USER 41 > (gensym)
#:G1085
CL-USER 42 > (gensym)
#:G1086
gensym is often used in Lisp macros for code generation, when the macro needs to create new identifiers, which then don't clash with existing identifiers.
Example: we are going to double the result of a Lisp form and we are making sure that the Lisp form itself will be computed only once. We do that by saving the value in a local variable. The identifier for the local variable will be computed by gensym.
CL-USER 43 > (defmacro double-it (it)
(let ((new-identifier (gensym)))
`(let ((,new-identifier ,it))
(+ ,new-identifier ,new-identifier))))
DOUBLE-IT
CL-USER 44 > (macroexpand-1 '(double-it (cos 1.4)))
(LET ((#:G1091 (COS 1.4)))
(+ #:G1091 #:G1091))
T
CL-USER 45 > (double-it (cos 1.4))
0.33993432
a little clarification of the existing answers (as the op is not yet aware of the typical common lisp macros workflow):
consider the macro double-it, proposed by mr. Joswig. Why would we bother creating this whole bunch of let? when it can be simply:
(defmacro double-it (it)
`(+ ,it ,it))
and ok, it seems to be working:
CL-USER> (double-it 1)
;;=> 2
but look at this, we want to increment x and double it
CL-USER> (let ((x 1))
(double-it (incf x)))
;;=> 5
;; WHAT? it should be 4!
the reason can be seen in macro expansion:
(let ((x 1))
(+ (setq x (+ 1 x)) (setq x (+ 1 x))))
you see, as the macro doesn't evaluate form, just splices it into generated code, it leads to incf being executed twice.
the simple solution is to bind it somewhere, and then double the result:
(defmacro double-it (it)
`(let ((x ,it))
(+ x x)))
CL-USER> (let ((x 1))
(double-it (incf x)))
;;=> 4
;; NICE!
it seems to be ok now. really it expands like this:
(let ((x 1))
(let ((x (setq x (+ 1 x))))
(+ x x)))
ok, so what about the gensym thing?
let's say, you want to print some message, before doubling your value:
(defmacro double-it (it)
`(let* ((v "DOUBLING IT")
(val ,it))
(princ v)
(+ val val)))
CL-USER> (let ((x 1))
(double-it (incf x)))
;;=> DOUBLING IT
;;=> 4
;; still ok!
but what if you accidentally name value v instead of x:
CL-USER> (let ((v 1))
(double-it (incf v)))
;;Value of V in (+ 1 V) is "DOUBLING IT", not a NUMBER.
;; [Condition of type SIMPLE-TYPE-ERROR]
It throws this weird error! Look at the expansion:
(let ((v 1))
(let* ((v "DOUBLING IT") (val (setq v (+ 1 v))))
(princ v)
(+ val val)))
it shadows the v from the outer scope with string, and when you are trying to add 1, well it obviously can't. Too bad.
another example, say you want to call the function twice, and return 2 results as a list:
(defmacro two-funcalls (f v)
`(let ((x ,f))
(list (funcall x ,v) (funcall x ,v))))
CL-USER> (let ((y 10))
(two-funcalls (lambda (z) z) y))
;;=> (10 10)
;; OK
CL-USER> (let ((x 10))
(two-funcalls (lambda (z) z) x))
;; (#<FUNCTION (LAMBDA (Z)) {52D2D4AB}> #<FUNCTION (LAMBDA (Z)) {52D2D4AB}>)
;; NOT OK!
this class of bugs is very nasty, since you can't easily say what's happened.
What is the solution? Obviously not to name the value v inside macro. You need to generate some sophisticated name that no one would reproduce in their code, like my-super-unique-value-identifier-2019-12-27. This would probably save you, but still you can't really be sure. That's why gensym is there:
(defmacro two-funcalls (f v)
(let ((fname (gensym)))
`(let ((,fname ,f))
(list (funcall ,fname ,v) (funcall ,fname ,v)))))
expanding to:
(let ((y 10))
(let ((#:g654 (lambda (z) z)))
(list (funcall #:g654 y) (funcall #:g654 y))))
you just generate the var name for the generated code, it is guaranteed to be unique (meaning no two gensym calls would generate the same name for the runtime session),
(loop repeat 3 collect (gensym))
;;=> (#:G645 #:G646 #:G647)
it still can potentially be clashed with user var somehow, but everybody knows about the naming and doesn't call the var #:GXXXX, so you can consider it to be impossible. You can further secure it, adding prefix
(loop repeat 3 collect (gensym "MY_GUID"))
;;=> (#:MY_GUID651 #:MY_GUID652 #:MY_GUID653)
GENSYM will generate a new symbol at each call. It will be garanteed, that the symbol did not exist before it will be generated and that it will never be generated again. You may specify a symbols prefix, if you like:
CL-USER> (gensym)
#:G736
CL-USER> (gensym "SOMETHING")
#:SOMETHING737
The most common use of GENSYM is generating names for items to avoid name clashes in macro expansion.
Another common purpose is the generaton of symbols for the construction of graphs, if the only thing demand you have is to attach a property list to them, while the name of the node is not of interest.
I think, the task of NFA-generation could make good use of the second purpose.
This is a note to some of the other answers, which I think are fine. While gensym is the traditional way of making new symbols, in fact there is another way which works perfectly well and is often better I find: make-symbol:
make-symbol creates and returns a fresh, uninterned symbol whose name is the given name. The new-symbol is neither bound nor fbound and has a null property list.
So, the nice thing about make-symbol is it makes a symbol with the name you asked for, exactly, without any weird numerical suffix. This can be helpful when writing macros because it makes the macroexpansion more readable. Consider this simple list-collection macro:
(defmacro collecting (&body forms)
(let ((resultsn (make-symbol "RESULTS"))
(rtailn (make-symbol "RTAIL")))
`(let ((,resultsn '())
(,rtailn nil))
(flet ((collect (it)
(let ((new (list it)))
(if (null ,rtailn)
(setf ,resultsn new
,rtailn new)
(setf (cdr ,rtailn) new
,rtailn new)))
it))
,#forms
,resultsn))))
This needs two bindings which the body can't refer to, for the results, and the last cons of the results. It also introduces a function in a way which is intentionally 'unhygienic': inside collecting, collect means 'collect something'.
So now
> (collecting (collect 1) (collect 2) 3)
(1 2)
as we want, and we can look at the macroexpansion to see that the introduced bindings have names which make some kind of sense:
> (macroexpand '(collecting (collect 1)))
(let ((#:results 'nil) (#:rtail nil))
(flet ((collect (it)
(let ((new (list it)))
(if (null #:rtail)
(setf #:results new #:rtail new)
(setf (cdr #:rtail) new #:rtail new)))
it))
(collect 1)
#:results))
t
And we can persuade the Lisp printer to tell us that in fact all these uninterned symbols are the same:
> (let ((*print-circle* t))
(pprint (macroexpand '(collecting (collect 1)))))
(let ((#2=#:results 'nil) (#1=#:rtail nil))
(flet ((collect (it)
(let ((new (list it)))
(if (null #1#)
(setf #2# new #1# new)
(setf (cdr #1#) new #1# new)))
it))
(collect 1)
#2#))
So, for writing macros I generally find make-symbol more useful than gensym. For writing things where I just need a symbol as an object, such as naming a node in some structure, then gensym is probably more useful. Finally note that gensym can be implemented in terms of make-symbol:
(defun my-gensym (&optional (thing "G"))
;; I think this is GENSYM
(check-type thing (or string (integer 0)))
(let ((prefix (typecase thing
(string thing)
(t "G")))
(count (typecase thing
((integer 0) thing)
(t (prog1 *gensym-counter*
(incf *gensym-counter*))))))
(make-symbol (format nil "~A~D" prefix count))))
(This may be buggy.)
I am a new emacs user. And trying to write some Elisp to learn this software better. While I meet some problems.
I want to use apply on progn to run a list of functions in sequence. But I got errors as below. I am just confused and need some help to tell me how to achieve this in Elisp, thanks.
(progn
(+ 1 1)
(+ 2 2)
)
;; => 4
(apply #'progn ((+ 1 1) (+ 2 2)))
;; => Invalid function: (+ 1 1)
(apply #'progn ('(+ 1 1) '(+ 2 2)))
;; => Invalid function: '(+ 1 1)
(apply #'progn '((+ 1 1) (+ 2 2)))
;; => Invalid function: #<subr progn>
I toy play as above cause I come to emacs from vim. So I installed evil and evil number. And want back the vim number inc and dec bindings C-a, C-x. So I write a macro as blow to avoid boilerplate.
(defmacro set-evil-number-keymap (key-set func &rest modes)
`(apply 'progn
,(-map
(lambda (mode)
`(define-key ,(intern (concat "evil-" mode "-state-map")) (kbd ,key-set)
',(intern
(concat "evil-numbers/" func))))
,modes)))
(set-evil-number-keymap "C-a" "inc-at-pt" "normal" "insert")
(set-evil-number-keymap "C-x" "dec-at-pt" "normal" "insert")
My expectation is something below. While it just not run.
(progn
(define-key evil-normal-state-map (kbd "C-a") ’evil-numbers/inc-at-pt) (define-key evil-visual-state-map (kbd "C-a") ’evil-numbers/inc-at-pt))
(progn
(define-key evil-normal-state-map (kbd "C-x") ’evil-numbers/dec-at-pt) (define-key evil-visual-state-map (kbd "C-x") ’evil-numbers/dec-at-pt))
You can't call apply on "special forms" like progn (see info (elisp)Special Forms), which have unique evaluation rules.
progn itself already provides a mechanism for sequenced evaluation, so your initial attempt does do what you want. At the top-level, however, the forms will be executed sequentially anyway, so there is no need for a progn there.
You don't need to use apply in the macro, elisp have ,# to flatten a list to args. So the correct answer is
(defmacro set-evil-number-keymap (key-set func &rest modes)
`(progn
,#(-map
(lambda (mode)
`(define-key ,(intern (concat "evil-" mode "-state-map")) (kbd ,key-set)
',(intern
(concat "evil-numbers/" func))))
,modes)))
Not sure what you're expecting. progn returns value of the last forms, so 4 is excepted, consult C-h f progn:
progn is a special form in `C source code'.
(progn BODY...)
Eval BODY forms sequentially and return value of last one.
If you want to see the result of (+ 1 1), you need to ask for it, for example,
(list (+ 1 1) (+ 2 2))
;; => (2 4)
;; Step 1
(list 2 (+ 2 2))
;; Step 2
(list 2 4)
;; Step 3
(2 4)
The function arguments are evaluated from left to right. By the way, Emacs Lisp doesn't support multiple return value.
(apply #'progn ((+ 1 1) (+ 2 2)))
;; => Invalid function: (+ 1 1)
Since the second argument of the function apply is ((+ 1 1) (+ 2 2)), Emacs needs to calculate its value and to calculate form like (foo 1 2 3), foo has to be a function, but (+ 1 2) is not a function, it's just an ordinary list with 3 elements.
(apply #'progn ('(+ 1 1) '(+ 2 2)))
;; => Invalid function: '(+ 1 1)
'(+ 1 2), that is, (quote (+ 1 2)) isn't a function either, it's a list with two elements.
(apply #'progn '((+ 1 1) (+ 2 2)))
;; => Invalid function: #<subr progn>
progn isn't a function, it's a special form. and, or, let and while are all special forms, they are like macros, they doesn't evaluate arguments eagerly.
(elisp) Calling Functions mentions
special forms and macros do not make sense in `apply'.
You had a bit of an XY problem, but what works for your nominal question is to
(eval (cons 'progn
'((print (+ 1 1))
(print (+ 2 2)))))
eval is generally considered a beginner programmer's misunderstanding, but in this case you just can't use apply for the reasons Rorschach explained. Elisp actually follows the Common Lisp spec here, which says for apply that
it is illegal for the symbol to be the name of a macro or special form
So, in general, you have to use eval directly on the program you've assembled by cons-ing a progn to your "instruction list".
I'm reading/working through Practical Common Lisp. I'm on the chapter about building a test framework in Lisp.
I have the function "test-+" implemented as below, and it works:
(defun test-+ ()
(check
(= (+ 1 2) 3)
(= (+ 5 6) 11)
(= (+ -1 -6) -7)))
Remember, I said, it works, which is why what follows is so baffling....
Here is some code that "test-+" refers to:
(defmacro check (&body forms)
`(combine-results
,#(loop for f in forms collect `(report-result ,f ',f))))
(defmacro combine-results (&body forms)
(with-gensyms (result)
`(let ((,result t))
,#(loop for f in forms collect `(unless ,f (setf ,result nil)))
,result)))
(defmacro with-gensyms ((&rest names) &body body)
`(let ,(loop for n in names collect `(,n (gensym)))
,#body))
(defun report-result (value form)
(format t "~:[FAIL~;pass~] ... ~a~%" value form)
value)
Now, what I've been doing is using Slime to macro-expand these, step by step (using ctrl-c RET, which is mapped to macroexpand-1).
So, the "check" call of "test-+" expands to this:
(COMBINE-RESULTS
(REPORT-RESULT (= (+ 1 2) 3) '(= (+ 1 2) 3))
(REPORT-RESULT (= (+ 5 6) 11) '(= (+ 5 6) 11))
(REPORT-RESULT (= (+ -1 -6) -7) '(= (+ -1 -6) -7)))
And then that macro-expands to this:
(LET ((#:G2867 T))
(UNLESS (REPORT-RESULT (= (+ 1 2) 3) '(= (+ 1 2) 3)) (SETF #:G2867 NIL))
(UNLESS (REPORT-RESULT (= (+ 5 6) 11) '(= (+ 5 6) 11)) (SETF #:G2867 NIL))
(UNLESS (REPORT-RESULT (= (+ -1 -6) -7) '(= (+ -1 -6) -7))
(SETF #:G2867 NIL))
#:G2867)
And it is THAT code, directly above this sentence, which doesn't work. If I paste that into the REPL, I get the following error (I'm using Clozure Common Lisp):
Unbound variable: #:G2867 [Condition of type UNBOUND-VARIABLE]
Now, if I take that same code, replace the gensym with a variable name such as "x", it works just fine.
So, how can we explain the following surprises:
The "test-+" macro, which calls all of this, works fine.
The macro-expansion of the "combine-results" macro does not run.
If I remove the gensym from the macro-expansion of "combine-results", it
does work.
The only thing I can speculate is that you cannot use code the contains literal usages of gensyms. If so, why not, and how does one work around that? And if that is not the explanation, what is?
Thanks.
GENSYM creates uninterned symbols. When the macro runs normally, this isn't a problem, because the same uninterned symbol is being substituted throughout the expression.
But when you copy and paste the expression into the REPL, this doesn't happen. #: tells the reader to return an uninterned symbol. As a result, each occurrence of #:G2867 is a different symbol, and you get the unbound variable warning.
If you do (setq *print-circle* t) before doing the MACROEXPAND it will use #n= and #n# notation to link the identical symbols together.
The code, after being printed and read back, is no longer the same code. In particular, the two instances of #:G2867 in the printed representation would be read back as two separated symbols (albeit sharing the same name), while they should be the same in the original internal representation.
Try setting *PRINT-CIRCLE* to T to preserve the identity in the printed representation of the macro-expanded code.
How to calculate the difference between two sets in Emacs Lisp? The sets should be lists.
The programm should be very simple and short, or else I won't understand it. I'm a newbee.
Thx
There is a set-difference function in the Common Lisp extensions:
elisp> (require 'cl-lib)
cl-lib
elisp> (cl-set-difference '(1 2 3) '(2 3 4))
(1)
When I write Elisp code that has lots of list data transformations, I use dash library, because it has loads of functions to work with lists. Set difference can be done with -difference:
(require 'dash)
(-difference '(1 2 3 4) '(3 4 5 6)) ;; => '(1 2)
Disclaimer: this is not an efficient way to do it in eLisp. An efficient way is through a hash-table with a hash function, but since you asked about lists, then here it is:
(defun custom-set-difference (a b)
(remove-if
#'(lambda (x) (and (member x a) (member x b)))
(append a b)))
(custom-set-difference '(1 2 3 4 5) '(2 4 6))
(1 3 5 6)
(defun another-set-difference (a b)
(if (null a) b
(let (removed)
(labels ((find-and-remove
(c)
(cond
((null c) nil)
((equal (car c) (car a))
(setq removed t) (cdr c))
(t (cons (car c) (find-and-remove (cdr c)))))))
(setf b (find-and-remove b))
(if removed
(another-set-difference (cdr a) b)
(cons (car a) (another-set-difference (cdr a) b)))))))
(another-set-difference '(1 2 3 4 5) '(2 4 6))
(1 3 5 6)
The second is slightly more efficient, because it will remove the elements as it makes consequent checks, but the first is shorter and more straight-forward.
Also note that lists are not good representation of sets because they naturally allow repetition. Hash maps are better for that purpose.
Here is a simple & short definition, which should be easy to understand. It is essentially the same as the set-difference function in the Common Lisp library for Emacs, but without any treatment of a TEST argument.
(defun set-diff (list1 list2 &optional key)
"Combine LIST1 and LIST2 using a set-difference operation.
Optional arg KEY is a function used to extract the part of each list
item to compare.
The result list contains all items that appear in LIST1 but not LIST2.
This is non-destructive; it makes a copy of the data if necessary, to
avoid corrupting the original LIST1 and LIST2."
(if (or (null list1) (null list2))
list1
(let ((keyed-list2 (and key (mapcar key list2)))
(result ()))
(while list1
(unless (if key
(member (funcall key (car list1)) keyed-list2)
(member (car list1) list2))
(setq result (cons (car list1) result)))
(setq list1 (cdr list1)))
result)))
GNU Emacs Lisp Reference Manual, Sets and Lists suggests using cl-lib's
cl-set-difference LIST1 LIST2 &key :test :test-not :key
(require 'cl-lib)
(cl-set-difference '(1 2 3) '(2 3 4))
(1)