Why do we need prefix, postfix notation - algorithm

I know how each of them can be converted to one another but never really understood what their applications are. The usual infix operation is quite readable, but where does it fail which led to inception of prefix and postfix notation

Infix notation is easy to read for humans, whereas pre-/postfix notation is easier to parse for a machine. The big advantage in pre-/postfix notation is that there never arise any questions like operator precedence.
For example, consider the infix expression 1 # 2 $ 3. Now, we don't know what those operators mean, so there are two possible corresponding postfix expressions: 1 2 # 3 $ and 1 2 3 $ #. Without knowing the rules governing the use of these operators, the infix expression is essentially worthless.
Or, to put it in more general terms: it is possible to restore the original (parse) tree from a pre-/postfix expression without any additional knowledge, but the same isn't true for infix expressions.

Postfix notation, also known as RPN, is very easy to process left-to-right. An operand is pushed onto a stack; an operator pops its operand(s) from the stack and pushes the result. Little or no parsing is necessary. It's used by Forth and by some calculators (HP calculators are noted for using RPN).
Prefix notation is nearly as easy to process; it's used in Lisp.

At least for the case of the prefix notation: The advantage of using a prefix operator is that syntactically, it reads as if the operator is a function call

Another aspect of prefix/postfix vs. infix is that the arity of the operator (how many arguments it is applied to) no longer has to be limited to exactly 2. It can be more, or sometimes less (0 or 1 when defaults are implied naturally, like zero for addition/subtraction, one for multiplication/division).

Related

Priority and association of terms in an expression evaluator with exponentiation operator

I am developing an expression evaluator. Which association is considered to be correct for an expression containing more than one exponentiation operator? For example, for the expression "10-2^2^0.5": "10-(2^2) ^0.5"= 8 or "10-2^ (2^0.5)" = 7.33485585731?
The result differs across languages and (possible) interpreters. However, most of them uses right-associative rule.
In Lua print(10-2^2^0.5) returns 7.3348 and in Visual Basic, Console.WriteLine(10-2^2^0.5) returns 8.
The fact that different systems uses different rules suggest me that there is no defined rule for that.

Retrieve internal/canonical representation of terms in Prolog

I am writing a program for which I need terms in their prefix notation.
The point is to being able to parse mathematical expressions to prefix notation, while preserving the correct order of Operations. I then want to save the result in the database for later use (using assert), which includes translating to another language, which uses prefix notation. Prolog Operators do all have a fixed priority which is a feature I want to use, as I will be using all sorts of operators (including clp operators).
As among others I need to include complete mathematical expressions, such as the equality operator. Thus I cannot recursively use the Univ operator (=..), because it won't accept equality operators etc. Or can I somehow use =.. ?
Essentially I want to work with the internal representation of
N is 3*4+5 % just a random example
which would be
is(N,+(*(3,4),5))
Now, I do know that I can use, write_canonical(N is 3*4+5) to get the internal representation as seen above.
So is there a way to somehow get the internal representation as a term or a list, or something.
Would it be possible to bind the output of write_canonical to a variable?
I hope my question is clear enough.
Prolog terms can be despicted as trees. But, when writing a term, the way a term is displayed depends on the defined operators and write options. Consider:
?- (N is 3*4+5) = is(N,+(*(3,4),5)).
true.
?- (N is 3*4+5) = is(Variable, Expression).
N = Variable,
Expression = 3*4+5.
?- 3*4+5 = +(*(3,4),5).
true.
I.e. operators are syntactic sugar. They don't change how terms are represented, only how terms are displayed.

Is a single constant value considered an expression?

After reading this answer on a CSS question, I wonder:
In Computer Science, is a single, constant value considered an expression?
In other words, is 7px an expression? What about just 7?
Quoting Wikipedia, emphasis mine:
An expression in a programming language is a combination of one or more explicit values, constants, variables, operators, and functions that the programming language interprets [...] and computes to produce [...] another value. This process, as for mathematical expressions, is called evaluation.
Quoting MS Docs, emphasis mine:
An expression is a sequence of one or more operands and zero or more operators that can be evaluated to a single value, object, method, or namespace. Expressions can consist of a literal value [...].
These both seems to indicate that values are expressions. However, one could argue that a value will not be evaluated, as it is already only a value, and therefore doesn't qualify.
Quoting Techopedia, emphasis mine:
[...] In terms of structure, experts point out that an expression inherently needs at least one 'operand’ or value that is acted on, and must have one or more operators. [...]
This suggests that even x does not qualify as expression as it is lacking one or more operators.
It depends on the exact definition of course, but under most definitions expressions are defined recursively with constants being one of the basis cases. So, yes, literal values are special cases of expressions.
You can look at grammars for various languages such as the one for Python
If you trace through the grammar you see that an expr can be an atom which includes number literals. The fact that number literals are Python expressions is also obvious when you consider productions like:
comparison: expr (comp_op expr)*
This is the production which captures expressions like x < 7, which wouldn't be captured if 7 isn't a valid expression.
In Computer Science, is a single, constant value considered an expression?
It depends entirely on the context. For example, FORTRAN, BASIC, and COBOL all have line numbers. Those are numeric constant values that are not expressions.
In other contexts (even within those languages) a numeric constant may be an expression.

what does slash(/) do in prolog?

I have this code:
set_value(X,Value,[X/_|T],[X/Value|T]).
set_value(X,Value,[Y/V|T],[Y/V|NewT):- X\=Y,set_value(X,Value,T,NewT).
set_value(X,Value,[],[X/Value]).
But I cannot figure out what does / do. It looks like it pairs variables, but I'm not 100% sure. It definitely isn't division operator. Thanks.
It doesn't do anything; it's used here to construct pairs, as you already figured.
Since the / doesn't occur on the right-hand side of is or in another place where arithmetic evaluation is performed, Prolog just produces two-argument terms with / as the functor. / is used because it can be written infix; - is also a popular choice for a generic pair constructor.

What is the operator precedence order in Visual Basic 6.0?

What is the operator precedence order in Visual Basic 6.0 (VB6)?
In particular, for the logical operators.
Arithmetic Operation Precedence Order
^
- (unary negation)
*, /
\
Mod
+, - (binary addition/subtraction)
&
Comparison Operation Precedence Order
=
<>
<
>
<=
>=
Like, Is
Logical Operation Precedence Order
Not
And
Or
Xor
Eqv
Imp
Source: Sams Teach Yourself Visual Basic 6 in 24 Hours — Appendix A: Operator Precedence
It depends on whether or not you're in the debugger. Really. Well, sort of.
Parentheses come first, of course. Then arithmateic (+,-,*,/, etc). Then comparisons (>, <, =, etc). Then the logical operators. The trick is the order of execution within a given precedence level is not defined. Given the following expression:
If A < B And B < C Then
you are guaranteed the < inequality operators will both be evaluated before the logical And comparison. But you are not guaranteed which inequality comparison will be executed first.
IIRC, the debugger executes left to right, but the compiled application executes right to left. I could have them backwards (it's been a long time), but the important thing is they're different. The actual precedence doesn't change, but the order of execution might.
Use parentheses
EDIT: That's my advice for new code! But Oscar is reading someone else's code, so must figure it out somehow. I suggest the VBA manual topic Operator Precedence. VBA is 99% equivalent to VB6 - and expression evaluation is 100% equivalent. I have pasted the logical operator information here.
Logical operators are evaluated in the following order of precedence:
Not
And
Or
Xor
Eqv
Imp
The topic also explains precedence for comparison and arithmetic operators.
I would suggest once you have figured out the precendence, you put in parentheses unless there is some good reason not to edit the code.

Resources