I understand how to remove elements when there are list and a variable, but is there a way to remove elements from a list using another list? EXAMPLE: (list 1 2 3 4 5)(list 1 2 3) yields (list 4 5)
It's the same as with a variable, but you need to use the member function instead of equal?:
#lang racket
; remove every element included in rlist from flist
(define (remove-list rlist flist)
(if (empty? flist)
'()
(let ((c (car flist)))
(if (member c rlist) ; <====
(remove-list rlist (cdr flist))
(cons c (remove-list rlist (cdr flist)))))))
(remove-list (list 1 2 3) (list 1 2 3 4 5))
=> '(4 5)
In Racket this is pretty simple, just use the remove* built-in procedure:
(remove* (list 1 2 3) (list 1 2 3 4 5))
=> '(4 5)
Related
I have the following filter procedure:
; (2) filter
(define (filter test sequence)
; return a list of the elements that pass the predicate test
(let ((elem (if (null? sequence) nil (car sequence)))
(rest (if (null? sequence) nil (cdr sequence))))
(cond ((null? sequence) nil)
((test elem) (cons elem (filter test rest)))
(else (filter test rest)))))
And here would be an example of using it to return the even-numbered elements of a list:
(define even? (lambda (x) (= (modulo x 2) 0)))
(define sequence '(1 2 3 4 5 8 9 11 13 14 15 16 17))
(filter even? sequence)
; (2 4 8 14 16)
Is there a simple way to use the not test to invert the selection? For example, I thought the following might work:
(filter (not even?) sequence)
But it returns an error. I can define odd separately, of course:
(define odd? (lambda (x) (not (even? x))))
But I'm trying not to do this. Is there a way to write the odd procedure without defining it directly, but instead using the not directly like I'm trying to do above?
There is a complement function in Common Lisp that does what I think you are looking for. complement is a higher-order procedure that takes a procedure as its argument, and returns a procedure that takes the same arguments as the input procedure and performs the same actions, but the returned truth value is inverted.
Racket has a similar procedure, negate, and it is easy enough to implement this in Scheme:
(define (complement f)
(lambda xs (not (apply f xs))))
> (filter even? '(1 2 3 4 5))
(2 4)
> (filter (complement even?) '(1 2 3 4 5))
(1 3 5)
> (> 1 2 3 4 5)
#f
> ((complement >) 1 2 3 4 5)
#t
And in Racket:
scratch.rkt> (filter even? '(1 2 3 4 5))
'(2 4)
scratch.rkt> (filter (negate even?) '(1 2 3 4 5))
'(1 3 5)
scratch.rkt> (> 1 2 3 4 5)
#f
scratch.rkt> ((negate >) 1 2 3 4 5)
#t
The general answer to this is to simply compose not and the function you care about. Racket has a compose function which does this, but you can easily write a simple one yourself:
(define (compose-1 . functions)
;; simple-minded compose: each function other than the last must
;; take just one argument; all functions should return just one
;; value.
(define (compose-loop fns)
(cond
((null? fns)
(λ (x) x))
((null? (cdr fns))
(car fns))
(else
(λ (x) ((car fns) ((compose-loop (cdr fns)) x))))))
(compose-loop functions))
Making it efficient and more general takes more work of course.
Then you can define odd? (which is already defined of course):
(define odd? (compose-1 not even)
Or in fact define a more general CL-style complement function:
(define (complement f)
(compose-1 not f))
One option is to write an invert function which will curry things along (so the initial function still accepts one argument) until the final evaluation occurs:
(define invert (lambda (func) (lambda (x) (not (func x)))))
(define sequence '(1 2 3 4 5 6 8 9 11 13 14 15 16 17))
(filter (invert even?) sequence)
; (1 3 5 9 11 13 15 17)
Deos anyone know, how I can make this funktion recursive by inserting the function somewhere? I am not allowed to use implemented functions for lists except append, make-pair(list) and reverse.
(: split-list ((list-of %a) -> (tuple-of (list-of %a) (list-of %a))))
(check-expect (split-list (list 1 2)) (make-tuple (list 1) (list 2)))
(check-expect (split-list (list 1 2 3 4)) (make-tuple (list 1 3) (list 2 4)))
(check-expect (split-list (list 1 2 3)) (make-tuple (list 1 3) (list 2)))
(check-expect (split-list (list 1 2 3 4 5)) (make-tuple (list 1 3 5) (list 2 4)))
(check-expect (split-list (list 1 2 3 4 5 6)) (make-tuple (list 1 3 5) (list 2 4 6)))
(define split-list
(lambda (x)
(match x
(empty empty)
((make-pair a empty) (make-tuple a empty))
((make-pair a (make-pair b empty)) (make-tuple (list a) (list b)))
((make-pair a (make-pair b c)) (make-tuple (list a (first c)) (list b (first(rest c))))))))
Code for make-tuple:
(define-record-procedures-parametric tuple tuple-of
make-tuple
tuple?
(first-tuple
rest-tuple))
Here's a way you can fix it using match and a named let, seen below as loop.
(define (split xs)
(let loop ((xs xs) ;; the list, initialized with our input
(l empty) ;; "left" accumulator, initialized with an empty list
(r empty)) ;; "right" accumulator, initialized with an empty list
(match xs
((list a b rest ...) ;; at least two elements
(loop rest
(cons a l)
(cons b r)))
((cons a empty) ;; one element
(loop empty
(cons a l)
r))
(else ;; zero elements
(list (reverse l)
(reverse r))))))
Above we use a loop to build up left and right lists then we use reverse to return the final answer. We can avoid having to reverse the answer if we build the answer in reverse order! The technique used here is called continuation passing style.
(define (split xs (then list))
(match xs
((list a b rest ...) ;; at least two elements
(split rest
(λ (l r)
(then (cons a l)
(cons b r)))))
((cons a empty) ;; only one element
(then (list a) empty))
(else ;; zero elements
(then empty empty))))
Both implementations perform to specification.
(split '())
;; => '(() ())
(split '(1))
;; => '((1) ())
(split '(1 2 3 4 5 6 7))
;; => '((1 3 5 7) (2 4 6))
Grouping the result in a list is an intuitive default, but it's probable that you plan to do something with the separate parts anyway
(define my-list '(1 2 3 4 5 6 7))
(let* ((result (split my-list)) ;; split the list into parts
(l (car result)) ;; get the "left" part
(r (cadr result))) ;; get the "right" part
(printf "odds: ~a, evens: ~a~n" l r))
;; odds: (1 3 5 7), evens: (2 4 6)
Above, continuation passing style gives us unique control over the returned result. The continuation is configurable at the call site, using a second parameter.
(split '(1 2 3 4 5 6 7) list) ;; same as default
;; '((1 3 5 7) (2 4 6))
(split '(1 2 3 4 5 6 7) cons)
;; '((1 3 5 7) 2 4 6)
(split '(1 2 3 4 5 6 7)
(λ (l r)
(printf "odds: ~a, evens: ~a~n" l r)))
;; odds: (1 3 5 7), evens: (2 4 6)
(split '(1 2 3 4 5 6 7)
(curry printf "odds: ~a, evens: ~a~n"))
;; odds: (1 3 5 7), evens: (2 4 6)
Oscar's answer using an auxiliary helper function or the first implementation in this post using loop are practical and idiomatic programs. Continuation passing style is a nice academic exercise, but I only demonstrated it here because it shows how to step around two complex tasks:
building up an output list without having to reverse it
returning multiple values
I don't have access to the definitions of make-pair and make-tuple that you're using. I can think of a recursive algorithm in terms of Scheme lists, it should be easy to adapt this to your requirements, just use make-tuple in place of list, make-pair in place of cons and make the necessary adjustments:
(define (split lst l1 l2)
(cond ((empty? lst) ; end of list with even number of elements
(list (reverse l1) (reverse l2))) ; return solution
((empty? (rest lst)) ; end of list with odd number of elements
(list (reverse (cons (first lst) l1)) (reverse l2))) ; return solution
(else ; advance two elements at a time, build two separate lists
(split (rest (rest lst)) (cons (first lst) l1) (cons (second lst) l2)))))
(define (split-list lst)
; call helper procedure with initial values
(split lst '() '()))
For example:
(split-list '(1 2))
=> '((1) (2))
(split-list '(1 2 3 4))
=> '((1 3) (2 4))
(split-list '(1 2 3))
=> '((1 3) (2))
(split-list '(1 2 3 4 5))
=> '((1 3 5) (2 4))
(split-list '(1 2 3 4 5 6))
=> '((1 3 5) (2 4 6))
split is kind of a de-interleave function. In many other languages, split names functions which create sublists/subsequences of a list/sequence which preserve the actual order. That is why I don't like to name this function split, because it changes the order of elements in some way.
Tail-call-rescursive solution
(define de-interleave (l (acc '(() ())))
(cond ((null? l) (map reverse acc)) ; reverse each inner list
((= (length l) 1)
(de-interleave '() (list (cons (first l) (first acc))
(second acc))))
(else
(de-interleave (cddr l) (list (cons (first l) (first acc))
(cons (second l) (second acc)))))))
You seem to be using the module deinprogramm/DMdA-vanilla.
The simplest way is to match the current state of the list and call it again with the rest:
(define split-list
(lambda (x)
(match x
;the result should always be a tuple
(empty (make-tuple empty empty))
((list a) (make-tuple (list a) empty))
((list a b) (make-tuple (list a) (list b)))
;call split-list with the remaining elements, then insert the first two elements to each list in the tuple
((make-pair a (make-pair b c))
((lambda (t)
(make-tuple (make-pair a (first-tuple t))
(make-pair b (rest-tuple t))))
(split-list c))))))
I am trying to write a procedure that takes a a symbol and a list and inserts the symbol at every possible position inside the given list (thus generating a list of lists). I have coded the following definitions, which I must implement:
1
(define (insert-at pos elmt lst)
(if (empty? lst) (list elmt)
(if (= 1 pos)
(cons elmt lst)
(cons (first lst)
(insert-at (- pos 1) elmt (rest lst))))))
2
(define (generate-all-pos start end)
(if (= start end)
(list end)
(cons start (generate-all-pos (+ start 1) end))))
1 takes a position in a list (number), a symbol and the list itself and inserts the symbol at the requested position.
2 takes a start and a target position (numbers) and creates a sorted list with numbers from start to target.
So far I have got this:
(define (insert-everywhere sym los)
(cond
[(empty? los) (list sym)]
[else (cons (insert-at (first (generate-all-pos (first los)
(first (foldl cons empty los)))) sym los) (insert-everywhere sym (rest los)))
]
)
)
Which results in
> (insert-everywhere 'r '(1 2 3))
(list (list 'r 1 2 3) (list 2 'r 3) (list 3 'r) 'r)
so I actually managed to move the 'r' around. I'm kind of puzzled about preserving the preceding members of the list. Maybe I'm missing something very simple but I've stared and poked at the code for quite some time and this is the cleanest result I've had so far. Any help would be appreciated.
Óscar López's answer shows how you can do this in terms of the procedures that you've already defined. I'd like to point out a way to do this that recurses down the input list. It uses an auxiliary function called revappend (I've taken the name from Common Lisp's revappend). revappend takes a list and a tail, and efficiently returns the same thing that (append (reverse list) tail) would.
(define (revappend list tail)
(if (null? list)
tail
(revappend (rest list)
(list* (first list) tail))))
> (revappend '(3 2 1) '(4 5 6))
'(1 2 3 4 5 6)
The reason that we're interested in such a function is that as we recurse down the input list, we can build up a list of the elements we've already seen, but it's in reverse order. That is, as we walk down (1 2 3 4 5), it's easy to have:
rhead tail (revappend rhead (list* item tail))
----------- ----------- -----------------------------------
() (1 2 3 4 5) (r 1 2 3 4 5)
(1) (2 3 4 5) (1 r 2 3 4 5)
(2 1) (3 4 5) (1 2 r 3 4 5)
(3 2 1) (4 5) (1 2 3 r 4 5)
(4 3 2 1) (5) (1 2 3 4 r 5)
(5 4 3 2 1) () (1 2 3 4 5 r)
In each of these cases, (revappend rhead (list* item tail)) returns a list with item inserted in one of the positions. Thus, we can define insert-everywhere in terms of rhead and tail, and revappend, if we build up the results list in reverse order, and reverse it at the end of the loop.
(define (insert-everywhere item list)
(let ie ((tail list)
(rhead '())
(results '()))
(if (null? tail)
(reverse (list* (revappend rhead (list* item tail)) results))
(ie (rest tail)
(list* (first tail) rhead)
(list* (revappend rhead (list* item tail)) results)))))
(insert-everywhere 'r '(1 2 3))
;=> '((r 1 2 3) (1 r 2 3) (1 2 r 3) (1 2 3 r))
What's interesting about this is that the sublists all share the same tail structure. That is, the sublists share the structure as indicated in the following “diagram.”
;=> '((r 1 2 3) (1 r 2 3) (1 2 r 3) (1 2 3 r))
; ----- +++ o
; +++ o
; o
The insert-everywhere procedure is overly complicated, a simple map will do the trick. Try this:
(define (insert-everywhere sym los)
(map (lambda (i)
(insert-at i sym los))
(generate-all-pos 1 (add1 (length los)))))
Also notice that in Racket there exists a procedure called range, so you don't need to implement your own generate-all-pos:
(define (insert-everywhere sym los)
(map (lambda (i)
(insert-at i sym los))
(range 1 (+ 2 (length los)))))
Either way, it works as expected:
(insert-everywhere 'r '(1 2 3))
=> '((r 1 2 3) (1 r 2 3) (1 2 r 3) (1 2 3 r))
I'm studying scheme and I have just encountered my first problem:
(define x (cons (list 1 2) (list 3 4)))
(length x)
3
why the output is 3 and not 2? I have displayed x
((1 2) 3 4)
why is like that and not ((1 2) . (3 4)) ?
Thanks.
Maybe it's easier to see this way.
You have:
(cons (list 1 2) (list 3 4))
If you
(define one-two (list 1 2))
you have
(cons one-two (list 3 4))
which is equivalent to
(cons one-two (cons 3 (cons 4 '())))
or
(list one-two 3 4)
which is
((1 2) 3 4)
List is the basic data structure of scheme.
Cons is used for making a pair of objects. List is the chain of cons.
eg. list (1 2 3 4) is same as (cons 1(cons 2(cons 3(cons 4 '())))).
See the block pointer representation for make it clear
I have this program:
(define scale-tree
(lambda (tree factor)
(map (lambda (sub-tree)
(if (list? sub-tree)
(scale-tree sub-tree factor)
(* sub-tree factor)))
tree)))
(scale-tree (list 1 (list 2 (list 3 4) 5) (list 6 7))
10)
How does this code work? First, we give it the whole list as parameter (list 1 (list 2 (list 3 4) 5) (list 6 7)), and in the first call, the (lambda (sub-tree) gets the (list 1 (list 2 (list 3 4) 5) (list 6 7)) as parameter. For that, we call (scale-tree sub-tree factor) with (list 1 (list 2 (list 3 4) 5) (list 6 7)) again. When does the list reduce?
Thank you.
Remember what map does - it applies a function to every element of a list. So on the first call, this function:
(lambda (sub-tree)
(if (list? sub-tree)
(scale-tree sub-tree factor)
(* sub-tree factor)))
is being applied to the elements of your list: 1, (list 2 (list 3 4) 5), and (list 6 7). And so on in the recursive calls.