This code replaces first person words with second person words and vice versa. However, it goes through each pair for each word in the phrase, so sometimes it will change back.
Here is the code:
(define (replace pattern replacement lst replacement-pairs)
(cond ((null? lst) '())
((equal? (car lst) pattern)
(cons replacement
(many-replace (cdr replacement-pairs) (cdr lst))))
(else (cons (car lst)
(many-replace (cdr replacement-pairs) (cdr lst))))))
(define (many-replace replacement-pairs lst)
(cond ((null? replacement-pairs) lst)
(else (let ((pat-rep (car replacement-pairs)))
(replace (car pat-rep)
(cadr pat-rep)
(many-replace (cdr replacement-pairs)
lst) replacement-pairs)))))
(define (change-person phrase)
(many-replace '((i you) (me you) (am are) (my your) (are am) (you i) (your my))
phrase))
For example if I entered
(change-person '(you are not being very helpful to me))
it would change you to i but then back to you. How do I fix this?
The procedures replace and many-replace are overly complicated, and the mutual recursion is not doing what you think. If we simplify those procedures and make sure that only a single pass is performed over the input list, we can get a correct answer:
(define (replace replacement-pairs pattern)
(cond ((null? replacement-pairs)
pattern)
((equal? (caar replacement-pairs) pattern)
(cadar replacement-pairs))
(else
(replace (cdr replacement-pairs) pattern))))
(define (many-replace replacement-pairs lst)
(if (null? lst)
'()
(cons (replace replacement-pairs (car lst))
(many-replace replacement-pairs (cdr lst)))))
The keen eye will notice that the previous procedures can be expressed in a succinct way by using some higher-order procedures. A more idiomatic solution could look like this:
(define (replace replacement-pairs pattern)
(cond ((assoc pattern replacement-pairs) => cadr)
(else pattern)))
(define (many-replace replacement-pairs lst)
(map (curry replace replacement-pairs) lst))
Either way, it works as expected:
(change-person '(you are not being very helpful to me))
=> '(i am not being very helpful to you)
I've written a slightly easier solution:
(define (many-replace pattern phrase)
(let loop ((phrase phrase) (result '()))
(if (empty? phrase) (reverse result)
(let* ((c (car phrase)) (a (assoc c pattern)))
(if a
(loop (cdr phrase) (cons (cadr a) result))
(loop (cdr phrase) (cons c result)))))))
(change-person '(you are not being very helpful to me))
=> '(i am not being very helpful to you)
Related
I have code which is inserting new word on the right side of choosen word
(define insertR
(lambda (new old lst)
(cond
((null? lst) (lst))
(else (cond
((eq? (car lst) old)
(cons old
(cons new (cdr lst))))
(else (cons (car lst)
(insertR new old
(cdr lst)))))))))
i need to make it insert that word beside first appearance of word starting from the end of list. Tried to work with reverse but could not get that to work.
There are two strategies you can take to add it next to the last occurence.
The first is to use a helper and start off with the reverse list. This is very simple and my preferred solution.
(define (insert-by-last-match insert find lst)
(let loop ((lst (reverse lst)) (acc '()))
(if (null? lst)
acc
(let ((a (car lst)))
(if (equal? a find)
(append (reverse (cdr lst))
(list* find insert acc))
(loop (cdr lst) (cons a acc)))))))
The other one is kind of obscure. Whenever you find the element you replace last-match with a callback that replaces the computation since it was made and until it gets called with the replacement and the rest of the list, which of course is the correct result. The work done until the end of the list is simply discarded since it is not used, but we do it since we are not sure if we are going to find a later one and then all the work uptil that is of course included in the result.
(define (insert-by-last-match insert find lst)
(define (helper lst last-match)
(if (null? lst)
(last-match)
(let* ((a (car lst)) (d (cdr lst)))
(cons a
(if (equal? a find)
(let/cc k
(helper d (lambda () (k (cons insert d)))))
(helper d last-match))))))
(helper lst (lambda () lst)))
call/cc (or its variant let/cc) is often described as time travel or advanced goto. It is not very intuitive. Here is a CPS version:
(define (insert-by-last-match insert find lst)
(define (helper lst last-match k)
(if (null? lst)
(last-match)
(let* ((a (car lst)) (d (cdr lst)) (k2 (lambda (v) (k (cons a v)))))
(if (equal? a find)
(helper d (lambda () (k2 (cons insert d))) k2)
(helper d last-match k2)))))
(helper lst (lambda () lst) (lambda (v) v)))
Basically this is the same as the previous only that here I have written the CPS code and with the let/cc version the implementation does it for me and I get to use k exactly where I need it. In this version you see there is no magic or time travel but the execution that should happen later is simply replaced at a point.
Write in a similar way insertL and apply it to the reversed list.
And reverse the result. Then you will have an insertion beside first appearance of word starting from the end of list
(define insertL
(lambda (new old lst)
(cond ((null? lst) '())
((eq? (car lst) old) (cons new lst))
(else (cons (car lst) (insertL new old (cdr lst)))))))
(define last-insertR
(lambda (new old lst)
(let* ((rlst (reverse lst))
(result (insertL new old rlst)))
(reverse result))))
test:
(last-insertR 'aa 'a '(b c d a h i a g))
;; '(b c d a h i a aa g)
By the way, the beauty of cond is that you can put the conditions always at the beginning - listed one under the other.
So one can write your insertR nicer as:
(define insertR
(lambda (new old lst)
(cond ((null? lst) '())
((eq? (car lst) old) (cons old (cons new (cdr lst))))
(else (cons (car lst) (insertR new old (cdr lst)))))))
Consider:
(define (nested-reverse lst)
(cond ((null? lst) '())
((list? (car lst)) (nested-reverse (car lst)))
(else
(cons (nested-reverse (cdr lst))
(list (car lst))))))
When I input,
(nested-reverse '((a b c) 42))
it gives me ((() 42) (a b c)). It's supposed to give me (42 (c b a)). How I would change my code so that the nested lists also get reversed?
Keep in mind that a list (1 2 3) is (cons 1 (cons 2 (cons 3 '()))). Using append is a very poor choice on how to reverse a list since append is implemented like this:
(define (append lst1 lst2)
(if (null? lst1)
lst2
(cons (car lst1) (append (cdr lst1) lst2))))
A list can be iterated from the first element towards the end while it can only be made in reverse. Thus the obvious none recursive reverse would look like something like this:
(define (simple-reverse lst)
(let loop ((lst lst) (result '()))
(if (null? lst)
result
(loop (cdr lst) (cons (car lst) result)))))
To make it work for nested list you check if you need to reverse (car lst) by checking of it's a list or not and use the same procedure as you are creating to do the reverse on the element as well. Other than that it's very similar.
I wrote a small function that takes a list and returns a list composed of only positive numbers. This all works fine, but for some reason, it is reversing the order. More information below on that. Could someone please tell me if this is normal, or if I miss-wrote something? Thank you in advance.
(define (positive-nums-only lst)
(if (empty? lst)
'()
(append (positive-nums-only (cdr lst))
(if (>= (car lst) 0)
(list (car lst))
'()))))
(positive-nums-only '(1 2 -4 90 -4))
The above test case returns '(90 2 1)
You did not make a mistake, the program is making what you asked.
See, the program finishes the recursion calls first, before going into resolving the if statement. This causes the (list ... ) to start listing from the last element that is positive, in this example it will be 90.
Changing the code order will produce the result you want.
(define (positive-nums-only lst)
(if (empty? lst) '()
(append (if (>= (car lst) 0 )
(list (car lst))
'())
(positive-nums-only (cdr lst)))
)
)
On the other hand, this kind of recursion could be expensive to the computer. I'd use tail recursion, like this:
(define positive-nums-only-tail
(λ (lst r)
(cond ((empty? lst) (reverse r))
((positive? (car lst))
(positive-nums-only-tail (cdr lst)
(cons (car lst) r)))
(else (positive-nums-only-tail (cdr lst) r))
)
)
)
Have you tried reversing the append?
(define (positive-nums-only lst)
(if (empty? lst)
'()
(append (if (>= (car lst) 0) (list (car lst)) '())
(positive-nums-only (cdr lst)))))
Personally I find it more natural to write it like this:
(define (positive-nums-only lst)
(if (empty? lst)
'()
(let ((rest (positive-nums-only (cdr lst))))
(if (>= (car lst) 0)
(cons (car lst) rest)
rest))))
So i have these two functions that work fine alone. I am trying to write one function to accomplish both but i keep getting a car error. Any guidance on the best way to solve this?
(define (countNumbers lst)
(cond
((null? lst) 0)
((number? (car lst))(+ 1 (countNumbers (cdr lst))))
(else (countNumbers (cdr lst)))))
(define (flatten x)
(cond ((null? x) '())
((pair? x) (append (flatten (car x)) (flatten (cdr x))))
(else (list x))))
I tried something like this im rather new to functional programming in general so im still trying to wrap my mind around it it says the problem is after number?(car lst)
(define (flatten lst)
(cond ((null? lst) '())
((pair? lst) (append (flatten (car lst)) (flatten (cdr lst))))
(else (list(cond
((null? lst) 0)
((number? (car lst))(+ 1 (flatten (cdr lst))))
(else (flatten (cdr lst))))))))
As I mentioned in my comment, I don't think it's a good idea to stick everything in a single function. Anyway, you were kinda on the right track, but we have to remember that if we're going to return a number as the final result, then our base case should reflect this and also return a number (not an empty list), and the combining step should add numbers, not append them. This is what I mean:
(define (count-flatten lst)
(cond ((null? lst) 0)
((pair? lst)
(+ (count-flatten (car lst))
(count-flatten (cdr lst))))
((number? lst) 1)
(else 0)))
But I'd rather do this:
(define (count-flatten lst)
(countNumbers (flatten lst)))
We can even write an idiomatic solution using only built-in procedures, check your interpreter's documentation, but in Racket we can do this:
(define (count-flatten lst)
(count number? (flatten lst)))
Anyway, it works as expected:
(count-flatten '(1 x (x 2) x (3 (4 x (5) 6) 7)))
=> 7
I have been working on the following function flatten and so far have it working for just lists. I was wondering if someone could provide me with some insight on how to get it work with pairs? For example (flatten '(a .a)) would return (a a). Thanks.
(define (flatten list)
(cond ((null? list) null)
((list? (car list)) (append (flatten (car list)) (flatten (cdr list))))
(else
(cons (car list) (flatten (cdr list))))))
Here's one option:
(define (flatten x)
(cond ((null? x) '())
((pair? x) (append (flatten (car x)) (flatten (cdr x))))
(else (list x))))
This does what you want, without requiring append, making it o(n). I walks the list as a tree. Some schemes might throw a stack overflow error if the list is too deeply nested. In guile this is not the case.
I claim no copyright for this code.
(define (flatten lst)
(let loop ((lst lst) (acc '()))
(cond
((null? lst) acc)
((pair? lst) (loop (car lst) (loop (cdr lst) acc)))
(else (cons lst acc)))))
(define (flatten l)
(cond
[(empty? l) empty]
[(list? l)
(append (flatten (first l))
(flatten (rest l)))]
[else (list l)]))