I want to test if a list is even, in . Like (evenatom '((h i) (j k) l (m n o)) should reply #t because it has 4 elements.
From Google, I found how to check for odd:
(define (oddatom lst)
(cond
((null? lst) #f)
((not (pair? lst)) #t)
(else (not (eq? (oddatom (car lst)) (oddatom (cdr lst)))))))
to make it even, would I just swap the car with a cdr and cdr with car?
I'm new to Scheme and just trying to get the basics.
No, swapping the car and cdr won't work. But you can swap the #f and #t.
Also, while the list you gave has 4 elements, what the function does is actually traverse into sublists and count the atoms, so you're really looking at 8 atoms.
You found odd atom using 'Google' and need even atom. How about:
(define (evenatom obj) (not (oddatom obj)))
or, adding some sophistication,
(define (complement pred)
(lambda (obj) (not (pred obj))))
and then
(define evenatom (complement oddatom))
you are mixing a procedure to check if a list has even numbers of elements (not restricted to atoms) and a procedure that checks if there are an even number of atomic elements in the list structure. Example: ((a b) (c d e) f) has an odd number of elements (3) but an even number (6) of atoms.
If you had some marbles, how would you determine if you had an odd or even number of marbles? you could just count them as normal and check the end sum for evenness or count 1,0,1,0 or odd,even,odd,even so that you really didn't know how many marbles I had in the end, only if it's odd or even. Lets do both:
(define (even-elements-by-count x)
(even? (length x)))
(define (even-elements-by-boolean x)
(let loop ((x x)(even #t))
(if (null? x)
even
(loop (cdr x) (not even)))))
now imagine that you had some cups in addition and that they had marbles to and you wondered the same. You'd need to count the elements on the floor and the elements in cups and perhaps there was a cup in a cup with elements as well. For this you should look at How to count atoms in a list structure and use the first approach or modify one of them to update evenness instead of counting.
The equivalent of the procedure you link to, for an even number of atoms, is
(define (evenatom lst)
(cond
((null? lst) #t)
((not (pair? lst)) #f)
(else (eq? (evenatom (car lst)) (evenatom (cdr lst))))))
You need to swap #t and #f, as well as leave out the not clause of the last line.
Related
I want to make a function to get the N-th first element of a list.
For example :
>>(firsts 3 '(a b c d e))
return : (a b c)
I made that :
(define (firsts number lst)
(let ((maliste '()))
(if (equal? 0 number)
maliste
(and (set! maliste (cons (car lst) maliste)) (firsts (- number 1) (cdr lst))))))
But it doesn't work, I think I should use a let but I don't know how.
Thanks .
It's a lot simpler, remember - you should try to think functionally. In Lisp, using set! (or other operations that mutate state) is discouraged, a recursive solution is the natural approach. Assuming that the list has enough elements, this should work:
(define (firsts number lst)
; as an exercise: add an extra condition for handling the
; case when the list is empty before the number is zero
(if (equal? 0 number)
'()
(cons (car lst)
(firsts (- number 1) (cdr lst)))))
I'm stuck on a homework question and could use any hints or suggestions. I need to find the n largest numbers in a list using Scheme. I am trying to do this by creating helper functions that are called by the main function. So far I have this:
(define (get_max_value L)
(if (null? L)
'()
(apply max L)
)
(define (biggest_nums L n)
(if (null? n)
'()
(cons (get_max_value L) (biggest_nums L (- n 1)))
)
)
When I type (biggest_num '(3 1 4 2 5) 3) at the command prompt drRacket just hangs and doesn't even return an error message. Where am I going wrong?
The simplest solution is to first sort the numbers in ascending order and then take the n first. This translates quite literally in Racket code:
(define (biggest_nums L n)
(take (sort L >) n))
It works as expected:
(biggest_nums '(3 1 4 2 5) 3)
=> '(5 4 3)
Two mains problems with your code:
L always stays the same. L doesn't decrease in size when you make the recursive call, so the max will always be the same number in every recursive call.
You don't ever check n to make sure it contains the correct amount of numbers before returning the answer.
To solve these two problems in the most trivial way possible, you can put a (< n 1) condition in the if, and use something like (cdr L) to make L decrease in size in each recursive call by removing an element each time.
(define (biggest-nums n L)
(if (or (empty? L)
(< n 1))
'()
(cons (apply max L) (biggest-nums (- n 1) (cdr L)))))
So when we run it:
> (biggest-nums 3 '(1 59 2 10 33 4 5))
What should the output be?
'(59 33 10)
What is the actual output?
'(59 59 33)
OK, so we got your code running, but there are still some issues with it. Do you know why that's happening? Can you step through the code to figure out what you could do to fix it?
Just sort the list and then return the first n elements.
However, if the list is very long and n is not very large, then you probably don't want to sort the whole list first. In that case, I would suggest something like this:
(define insert-sorted
(lambda (item lst)
(cond ((null? lst)
(list item))
((<= item (car lst))
(cons item lst))
(else
(cons (car lst) (insert-sorted item (cdr lst)))))))
(define largest-n
(lambda (count lst)
(if (<= (length lst) count)
lst
(let loop ((todo (cdr lst))
(result (list (car lst))))
(if (null? todo)
result
(let* ((item (car todo))
(new-result
(if (< (car result) item)
(let ((new-result (insert-sorted item result)))
(if (< count (length new-result))
(cdr new-result)
new-result))
result)))
(loop (cdr todo)
new-result)))))))
I'm new to Scheme and this is my very first Functional language. Implementing almost everything recursively seems to be awkward for me. Nevertheless, was able to implement functions of Factorial and Fibonacci problems having a single integer input.
However, what about when your function has an input of a list? Suppose this exercise:
FUNCTION: ret10 - extracts and returns as a list all the numbers greater than 10
that are found in a given list, guile> (ret10 ‘(x e (h n) 1 23 12 o))
OUTPUT: (23 12)
Should I have (define c(list)) as the argument of my function in this? or is there any other way?
Please help. Thanks!
Here's my derived solution based on sir Óscar López's answer below.. hope this helps others:
(define (ret10 lst)
(cond
((null? lst) '())
((and (number? (car lst)) (> (car lst) 10))
(cons (car lst)
(ret10 (cdr lst))))
(else (ret10 (cdr lst)))
)
)
This kind of problem where you receive a list as input and return another list as output has a well-known template for a solution. I'd start by recommending you take a look at The Little Schemer or How to Design Programs, either book will teach you the correct way to start thinking about the solution.
First, I'll show you how to solve a similar problem: copying a list, exactly as it comes. That'll demonstrate the general structure of the solution:
(define (copy lst)
(cond ((null? lst) ; if the input list is empty
'()) ; then return the empty list
(else ; otherwise create a new list
(cons (car lst) ; `cons` the first element
(copy (cdr lst)))))) ; and advance recursion over rest of list
Now let's see how the above relates to your problem. Clearly, the base case for the recursion will be the same. What's different is that we cons the first element with the rest of the list only if it's a number (hint: use the number? procedure) and it's greater than 10. If the condition doesn't hold, we just advance the recursion, without consing anything. Here's the general idea, fill-in the blanks:
(define (ret10 lst)
(cond (<???> <???>) ; base case: empty list
(<???> ; if the condition holds
(cons <???> ; `cons` first element
(ret10 <???>))) ; and advance recursion
(else ; otherwise
(ret10 <???>)))) ; simply advance recursion
Don't forget to test it:
(ret10 '(x e (h n) 1 23 12 o))
=> '(23 12)
As a final note: normally you'd solve this problem using the filter procedure - which takes as input a list and returns as output another list with only the elements that satisfy a given predicate. After you learn and understand how to write a solution "by hand", take a look at filter and write the solution using it, just to compare different approaches.
Solve the problem for the first element of the list and the recurse on rest of the list. Make sure you handle the termination condition (list is null?) and combine results (cons or append in the following)
(define (extract pred? list)
(if (null? list)
'()
(let ((head (car list))
(rest (cdr list)))
(cond ((pred? head) (cons head (extract pred? rest)))
((list? head) (append (extract pred? head)
(extract pred? rest)))
(else (extract pred? rest))))))
(define (ret10 list)
(extract (lambda (x) (and (number? x) (> x 10))) list))
> (ret10 '(0 11 (12 2) 13 3))
(11 12 13)
This is what I want:
(delete-third1 '(3 7 5)) ==> (3 7)
(delete-third1 '(a b c d)) ==> (a b d)
so I did something like:
(define (delete-third1 LS ) (list(cdr LS)))
which returns
(delete-third1 '(3 7 5))
((7 5))
when it should be (3 7). What am I doing wrong?
Think about what cdr is doing. cdr says that "given a list, chop off the first value and return the rest of the list". So it's removing only the first value, then returning you the rest of that list (which is exactly what you are seeing). Since it returns a list, you don't need a list (cdr LS) there either.
What you want is something like this:
(define (delete-n l n)
(if (= n 0)
(cdr l)
(append (list (car l)) (delete-n (cdr l) (- n 1)))))
(define (delete-third l)
(delete-n l 2))
So how does this work? delete-n will delete the nth element of a list by keeping a running count of what element we are up to. If we're not up to the nth element, then add that element to the list. If we are, then skip that element and add the rest of the elements to our list.
Then we simply define delete-third as delete-n where it removes the 3rd element (which is element 2 when we start counting at 0).
The simplest way would be: cons the first element, the second element and the rest of the list starting from the fourth position. Because this looks like homework I'll only give you the general idea, so you can fill-in the blanks:
(define (delete-third1 lst)
(cons <???> ; first element of the list
(cons <???> ; second element of the list
<???>))) ; rest of the list starting from the fourth element
The above assumes that the list has at least three elements. If that's not always the case, validate first the size of the list and return an appropriate value for that case.
A couple more of hints: in Racket there's a direct procedure for accessing the first element of a list. And another for accessing the second element. Finally, you can always use a sequence of cdrs to reach the rest of the rest of the ... list (but even that can be written more compactly)
From a practical standpoint, and if this weren't a homework, you could implement this functionality easily in terms of other existing procedures, and even make it general enough to remove elements at any given position. For example, for removing the third element (and again assuming there are enough elements in the list):
(append (take lst 2) (drop lst 3))
Or as a general procedure for removing an element from a given 0-based index:
(define (remove-ref lst idx)
(append (take lst idx) (drop lst (add1 idx))))
Here's how we would remove the third element:
(remove-ref '(3 7 5) 2)
=> '(3 7)
This works:
(define (delete-third! l)
(unless (or (null? l)
(null? (cdr l))
(null? (cddr l)))
(set-cdr! (cdr l) (cdddr l)))
l)
if you want a version that does not modify the list:
(define (delete-third l)
(if (not (or (null? l)
(null? (cdr l))
(null? (cddr l))))
(cons (car l) (cons (cadr l) (cdddr l)))
l))
and if you want to do it for any nth element:
(define (list-take list k)
(assert (not (negative? k)))
(let taking ((l list) (n k) (r '()))
(if (or (zero? n) (null? l))
(reverse r)
(taking (cdr l) (- n 1) (cons (car l) r)))))
(define (delete-nth l n)
(assert (positive? n))
(append (list-take l (- n 1))
(if (> n (length l))
'()
(list-tail l n))))
(define (nth-deleter n)
(lambda (l) (delete-nth l n)))
(define delete-3rd (nth-deleter 3))
Hey guys, I'm using MIT Scheme and trying to write a procedure to find the average of all the numbers in a bunch of nested lists, for example:
(average-lists (list 1 2 (list 3 (list 4 5)) 6)))
Should return 3.5. I've played with the following code for days, and right now I've got it returning the sum, but not the average. Also, it is important that the values of the inner-most lists are calculated first, so no extracting all values and simply averaging them.
Here's what I have so far:
(define (average-lists data)
(if (null? data)
0.0
(if (list? (car data))
(+ (average-lists (car data)) (average-lists (cdr data)))
(+ (car data) (average-lists (cdr data))))))
I've tried this approach, as well as trying to use map to map a lambda function to it recursively, and a few others, but I just can't find one. I think I'm making thing harder than it should be.
I wrote the following in an effort to pursue some other paths as well, which you may find useful:
(define (list-num? x) ;Checks to see if list only contains numbers
(= (length (filter number? x)) (length x)))
(define (list-avg x) ;Returns the average of a list of numbers
(/ (accumulate + 0 x) (length x)))
Your help is really appreciated! This problem has been a nightmare for me. :)
Unless the parameters require otherwise, you'll want to define a helper procedure that can calculate both the sum and the count of how many items are in each list. Once you can average a single list, it's easy to adapt it to nested lists by checking to see if the car is a list.
This method will get you the average in one pass over the list, rather than the two or more passes that solutions that flatten the list or do the count and the sums in two separate passes. You would have to get the sum and counts separately from the sublists to get the overall average, though (re. zinglon's comment below).
Edit:
One way to get both the sum and the count back is to pass it back in a pair:
(define sum-and-count ; returns (sum . count)
(lambda (ls)
(if (null? ls)
(cons 0 0)
(let ((r (sum-and-count (cdr ls))))
(cons (+ (car ls) (car r))
(add1 (cdr r)))))))
That procedure gets the sum and number of elements of a list. Do what you did to your own average-lists to it to get it to examine deeply-nested lists. Then you can get the average by doing (/ (car result) (cdr result)).
Or, you can write separate deep-sum and deep-count procedures, and then do (/ (deep-sum ls) (deep-count ls)), but that requires two passes over the list.
(define (flatten mylist)
(cond ((null? mylist) '())
((list? (car mylist)) (append (flatten (car mylist)) (flatten (cdr mylist))))
(else (cons (car mylist) (flatten (cdr mylist))))))
(define (myavg mylist)
(let ((flatlist (flatten mylist)))
(/ (apply + flatlist) (length flatlist))))
The first function flattens the list. That is, it converts '(1 2 (3 (4 5)) 6) to '(1 2 3 4 5 6)
Then its just a matter of applying + to the flat list and doing the average.
Reference for the first function:
http://www.dreamincode.net/code/snippet3229.htm