Filtering an expression output with regexp - scheme

The bad code of main is (string-match "module" (help uri-path)) that returns an error
scheme#(guile-user) [5]> (string-match "module" (help uri-path))
`uri-path' is an object in the (web uri) module.
- Special Form: uri-path
While compiling expression:
Syntax error:
unknown file:9:23: sequence of zero expressions in form (begin)
scheme#(guile-user) [5]>
What I am trying to reach, is displaying only one line of help function output. How to fix it?

Use procedure-documentation to get the documentation of a procedure as a string.
scheme#(guile-user)> (help cons)
`cons' is a procedure in the (ice-9 safe-r5rs) module.
- Scheme Procedure: cons x y
Return a newly allocated pair whose car is X and whose cdr is Y.
The pair is guaranteed to be different (in the sense of `eq?') from
every previously existing object.
scheme#(guile-user)> (procedure-documentation cons)
$6 = "- Scheme Procedure: cons x y\n Return a newly allocated pair whose car is X and whose cdr is Y.\n The pair is guaranteed to be different (in the sense of `eq?') from\n every previously existing object."

Related

Counting blocks in a specific location (autolisp)

So I'm making a simple function in autolisp to count the number of a specific block in a drawing, and it looks like this:
(defun c:contarblocos()
(setq ss (ssget "x" ' ((0. "INSERT") (2. "Nome do bloco"))))
(setq count (sslength ss))
(alert(strcat "Total de blocos no desenho: " (itoa count)))
)
Now, what I really want is to count the number of blocks in a specific area, defined by the user. In other words, the user will call the function, and then the function will ask for a specific area, where it will look for the specific block and count them, not counting any blocks from outside the selected area.
Rather than using the x mode string of the ssget function (which searches the entire drawing database for all entities which fulfil the criteria of the filter list argument), simply omit this argument to permit the user to make a selection using any valid selection method, e.g.:
(defun c:contarblocos ( / sel )
(if (setq sel (ssget '((0 . "INSERT") (2 . "Nome do bloco"))))
(alert (strcat "Total de blocos no desenho: " (itoa (sslength sel))))
)
(princ)
)
There are a few other issues with your current code:
Always declare the variables whose scope is local to your function: in my above example, you will note that the sel symbol is declared in the variable list within the defun expression. For more information on why this is important, you may wish to refer to my tutorial here.
You should test whether ssget returns a valid selection set before calling the sslength function to obtain the number of items in the set, since (sslength nil) will error. You will see that I use an if statement in my code to accomplish this.
The ssget filter list argument should be an association list of dotted pairs, and as such, there should be a space between the key and the value in each list item, hence this:
(0. "INSERT")
Should become:
(0 . "INSERT")
You should include a final (princ) or (prin1) expression within the defun expression so that the function returns a null symbol to the command line, rather than returning the value returned by the last evaluated expression (i.e. the alert expression, which will return nil). Including a (princ) expression per my example will ensure that the function exits 'cleanly'.

Dynamic function call in Racket class combined with apply

TL;DR
What I'm looking for is a combination of the functions send/apply and dynamic-send. So that it finds a method of an object based on a symbol and unpacks a list of arguments.
Background and more info
For a project I am sending some "commands" trough the network with Racket's tcp-connect. At the receivers end this command should execute a method from a class and pass along its parameters.
Consider the following received 'message':
(define message (list 'set-switch! '3 'on))
(define method-name (car msg)) ;'set-switch!
(define parameters (cdr msg)) ;(list '3 'on)
And the following class:
(define light%
(class object%
(super-new)
...
(define/public (set-switch! id mode)
(vector-set! switches id mode))))
The problem now is that when executing this statement
(dynamic-send light-class method-name parameters)
it perfectly finds the method set-switch! but it calls it with only one parameter (list '3 'on).
The Racket docs mention those three functions for classes:
(send obj-expr method-id arg) which just executes a method of an object
(send/apply obj-expr method-id arg-list-expr) which executes a method AND unpacks the argument list
(dynamic-send obj method-name v) which finds a method-name based on a symbol
What I think I need is something like (dynamic-send/apply obj method-name arg-list-expr) which combines the last two mentioned.
Note: I know that I could just simply accept lists as parameters and use car and cdr in the functions itself to get the right values. But that's not what I want.
dynamic-send is a function (also known as procedure; e.g., car, vector-set!, +), so you can use apply:
(apply dynamic-send light-class method-name parameters)
Or even simply:
(apply dynamic-send light-class message)
The reason why send has the send/apply variant is that send is a form (also known as syntax; e.g., let, define, if), so apply doesn't work and hence send/apply is separately provided.

re-internilizing a symbol from namespace-mapped-symbols

I'm not sure if the question title is appropriate but here is what I wonder:
From the repl, I wanted to get the list of bindings defined in the current module. After some searching this seemed like a good solution:
(define (racket-symbols-set)
(list->set (namespace-mapped-symbols (module->namespace 'racket))))
(define (namespace-symbols-set)
(list->set (namespace-mapped-symbols)))
(define (module-bindings)
(set->list (set-subtract
(namespace-symbols-set)
(racket-symbols-set))))
so, calling (module-bindings) returns a list of symbols. But if I try to call a symbol from that result, such as doing ((first (module-bindings))), I get a "application: not a procedure" error although the first symbol is a procedure.
How do I call the corresponding procedure of that symbol?
You can look up the value of a namespace variable using namespace-variable-value. And since your namespace-symbols-set just uses the current namespace, which is also the default namespace for namespace-variable-value, using it is very simple.
For example, to invoke the procedure associated with the first item in the list returned by your module-bindings procedure:
((namespace-variable-value (car (module-bindings))))
Alternatively, specify your preferred namespace as the fourth argument of the namespace-variable-value call.
You need to evaluate that symbol in order for it to return the corresponding procedure.
> (define (foo) 'bar)
> (eval 'foo)
#<procedure:foo>
> ((eval 'foo))
'bar
Hence in your case
((eval (car (module-bindings))))
will call the first procedure of the list returned by module-bindings.

Message passing scheme

Can anyone briefly explain to me how message passing is implemented in scheme? I think I am little off on the whole concept of message passing.
Take a look at SICP.
http://mitpress.mit.edu/sicp/full-text/book/book-Z-H-17.html#%_sec_2.4.1
http://www.michaelharrison.ws/weblog/?p=50
Message passing in the context of closures
The following example defines a closure implementing a simple calculator. The function make-calculator is similar to what object oriented languages call the constructor. The difference is: make-calculator returns a function, while constructors return object values. In object oriented languages object values are first class values. Scheme does not have such values. An object first class values provides the functionality to access object member variables and object methods. In Scheme this functionality has to be emulated by the definition of a dispatch function. make-calculator returns such a function. The body of make-calculator defines
two variables a and b (member variables)
two mutation functions set-a! and set-b! (accessors)
four evaluation functions addition, subtraction, multiplication and division (methods)
The above definitions are local to the closure make-calculator. In an object oriented language they are called private. The dispatch function makes the functions public and keeps the variables private. This works, because the dispatch function has access to the local scope of the make-calculator closure. The dispatch function accepts a message and returns the matching function. This exposes the local functions to the caller of the dispatch function.
(define (make-calculator)
(define a)
(define b)
(define (set-a! value)
(set! a value))
(define (set-b! value)
(set! b value))
(define (addition)
(+ a b))
(define (subtraction)
(- a b))
(define (multiplication)
(* a b))
(define (division)
(/ a b))
(lambda (message)
(case message
((set-a!) set-a!)
((set-b!) set-b!)
((addition) addition)
((subtraction) subtraction)
((multiplication) multiplication)
((division) division))))
First the constructor has to be called to create an "object". calc is the dispatch function, which accepts different messages, which are just symbols.
(define calc (make-calculator))
Sending a message means calling the dispatch function with a symbol argument. The following sends the message set-a! to calc, which returns the value of the local function set-a!. The name of the message and the name of the local function are the same in this case. This helps to avoid confusion, but it is not required.
(calc 'set-a!) ;; => #<procedure set-a!>
Because calc returns a function, an additional application is necessary to call the accessor. The following sets a to 3 and b to 5.
((calc 'set-a!) 3)
((calc 'set-b!) 5)
Now we can calculate:
((calc 'addition)) ;; => 8
((calc 'subtraction)) ;; => -2
((calc 'multiplication)) ;; => 15
((calc 'division)) ;; => 3/15
The code works this way in Chez Scheme.

Should the behaviour of a function depend on the name of its variable?

Here is a short elisp code which shows that the behaviour of a function depends on the name of its variable. Is this a bug?
A function is declared using a variable x. When that function is called with a variable named anything other than x, it works as expected. But if it is called with a variable named x, it fails!
My system is GNU Emacs 22.2.1 (powerpc-apple-darwin8.11.0, Carbon Version 1.6.0) of 2008-04-05 on g5.tokyo.stp.isas.jaxa.jp
Paste this on an emacs buffer, put the cursor after the last parehthesis and press \C-x\C-e to see that the function make-zero does now work correctly when called the second time.
(progn
(defun make-zero (x)
"Simple function to make a variable zero."
(set x 0))
(setq x 10)
(insert "\n Variable x is now equal to " (number-to-string x))
(setq y 20)
(insert "\n Variable y is now equal to " (number-to-string y))
(insert "\n\n Let us apply make-zero to y")
(make-zero 'y)
(insert "\n Variable y is now equal to " (number-to-string y))
(insert "\n\n Let us apply make-zero to x")
(make-zero 'x)
(insert "\n Variable x is now equal to " (number-to-string x))
(insert "\n\n Why make-zero had no effect on x? Is it because the name of the
variable in the definition of make-zero, namely 'x', is the same as the name of
the variable when make-zero was called? If you change the name of the variable
in the definition of make-zero from x to z, this strange behaviour will
disappear. This seems to be a bug in elisp."))
It's not a bug so much as the nature of Elisp's (and Lisp in general) dynamic binding. ' doesn't pass a reference (that is, it's not like & in C/C++), it passes an unevaluated symbol; what it then evaluates to depends on the scope in which it's evaluated, which means it gets the x that's in scope inside the function.
In Lisp-think, the normal way around this would be to use a macro.
(defmacro make-zero (x) (list 'set x 0))
or
(require 'cl)
(defmacro make-zero (x) `(set ,x 0))
It's not a bug. It'd be worth your while reading the manual entry for Scoping Rules For Variable Bindings.
The function you wrote calls set, which takes a symbol (the value of the first argument) and changes its value to the value of the 2nd argument. The make-zero you wrote binds x locally to its input argument, so when you pass in the symbol x, set changes the first binding for x it finds, which happens to be the local binding.
Here's a different example, let's say you just had the following:
(defun print-something (something)
(set 'something "NEW VALUE")
(insert something))
(print-something "OLD") ; inserts "NEW VALUE"
Looking at that snippet of code, does it make sense that the set line changes the local value of something?
It doesn't matter whether or not there's a global setting for the symbol something.
Another example is the following:
(defvar x "some global value") ;# could have used setq here
(let ((x "local binding"))
(set 'x "new value"))
Which binding would you expect the set line to change? The one created by the let or the global one created by defvar?
The function you wrote is (pretty much) doing exactly the same thing as the let, you're creating a local binding for a variable which is seen before the global one.
If you want to pass around a reference to a variable then the only safe way to do that is via macros, which I recommend, but not until you've grasped the basics of lisp (b/c macros are definitely more complicated). That said, don't let me stop you from diving into macros if that's your passion.
A good introduction to programming Emacs lisp can be found here.
geekosaur's answer does a nice job of showing how you'd achieve what you want.

Resources