This is my first experience with Scheme. I have a list with integers and I wanna get the sum of all even number in list.
; sum_even
(define (sum_even l)
(if (null? l) l
(cond ((even? (car l)) 0)
((not(even? (car l))) (car l)))
(+ (sum_even (car l) (sum_even(cdr l))))))
(sum_even '(2 3 4))
(define (sum_even l)
(cond ((null? l) 0)
((even? (car l)) (+ (car l) (sum_even (cdr l))))
(else (sum_even (cdr l)))))
Not tested
You're not exactly asking a question. Are you checking if your solution is correct or looking for an alternate solution?
You can also implement it as follows via
(apply + (filter even? lst))
edit: If, as you mentioned, you can't use filter, this solution will work and is tail-recursive:
(define (sum-even lst)
(let loop ((only-evens lst) (sum 0))
(cond
((null? only-evens) sum)
((even? (car only-evens))
(loop (cdr only-evens) (+ (car only-evens) sum)))
(else (loop (cdr only-evens) sum)))))
(define (sum-even xs)
(foldl (lambda (e acc)
(if (even? e)
(+ e acc)
acc))
0
xs))
Example:
> (sum-even (list 1 2 3 4 5 6 6))
18
Here is another one with higher order functions and no explicit recursion:
(use srfi-1)
(define (sum-even ls) (fold + 0 (filter even? ls)))
Consider using the built-in filter function. For example:
(filter even? l)
will return a list of even numbers in the list l. There are lots of ways to sum numbers in a list (example taken from http://groups.engin.umd.umich.edu/CIS/course.des/cis400/scheme/listsum.htm):
;
; List Sum
; By Jerry Smith
;
(define (list-sum lst)
(cond
((null? lst)
0)
((pair? (car lst))
(+(list-sum (car lst)) (list-sum (cdr lst))))
(else
(+ (car lst) (list-sum (cdr lst))))))
Related
I'm trying to do a program in scheme for a school assignment. Given a list, it's supposed to return all given permutations of that list. My issue is that I don't know why it would work for numbers but not characters. Doesn't seem like it would change any of the logic!
Here is my code:
(define (remove1 x lst)
(cond
((null? lst) '())
((= x (car lst)) (remove1 x (cdr lst)))
(else (cons (car lst)
(remove1 x (cdr lst))))))
(define (permute lst)
(cond
((= (length lst) 1) (list lst))
(else (apply append (map (lambda (i)
(map (lambda (j) (cons i j))
(permute (remove1 i lst))))
lst)))))
(permute '(1 2 3))
= is used for comparing numbers; for more general comparisons, use eq?, equal? or (as has been suggested) eqv?.
I am currently confused with the idea behind functional programming in general. I currently have a working solution to my problem (That is, finding the min and max of a list, and returning these in a new list) but to do that, my solution essentially requires 3 functions, and this bothers me, because I am sure there is a way to do it with just 1 function in scheme.
So.. my question is, how do I combine the outputs of 2 functions into 1 concise function? (The driver function)
Here is what I have...
(define (findMax lst) ; Find and return maximum number in a list
(cond [(null? lst) '()]
[(= (length lst) 1) (list-ref lst 0)]
[(> (list-ref lst 0) (list-ref lst (- (length lst) 1))) (findMax (drop-right lst 1))]
[(< (list-ref lst 0) (list-ref lst (- (length lst) 1))) (findMax (cdr lst))]
(else
(findMax (cdr lst))
)
)
)
(define (findMin lst) ; Find and return smallest number in a list
(cond [(null? lst) '()]
[(= (length lst) 1) (list-ref lst 0)]
[(> (list-ref lst 0) (list-ref lst (- (length lst) 1))) (findMin (cdr lst))]
[(< (list-ref lst 0) (list-ref lst (- (length lst) 1))) (findMin (drop-right lst 1))]
(else
(findMin (cdr lst))
)
)
)
I use a driver function to take both of these functions, and make a new list shown here:
(define (findEnds lst)
(list (findMin lst) (findMax lst))
)
So essentially, if given a list:
(6 7 8 4 9 2)
the output would be:
(2 9)
I know there is some way to use lambda possibly to do all of this in 1 function, but I need to be pointed in the right direction. Thanks!
Here's my version (note that I've changed it to return the result as a single dotted pair, rather than a list with two elements†):
(define (min/max lst)
(if (empty? lst)
#f
(let ((next (min/max (cdr lst))))
(define cur (car lst))
(if (not next)
(cons cur cur)
(cons (min (car next) cur) (max (cdr next) cur))))))
Example:
> (min/max '(3 1 4 1 5 9))
(1 . 9)
†If you really want to use a list of two elements, change all the cons to list, and change the (cdr next) to (cadr next).
This is actually a really good challenge that might help with learning some Scheme concepts. I've implemented min/max using fold-left. It might also be fun using a named-let
(define (min/max lst)
(fold-left
(lambda (acc num)
(cons (min num (car acc)) (max num (cdr acc))))
(cons +inf.0 -inf.0)
lst))
I have a list '(1 2 1 1 4 5) and want output list as '((1 3)(2 1)(4 1)(5 1)). I have written a small code but I am stuck with how to calculate the cardinality for each number and then put it as pair in list. Can anyone please look at my code and give some ideas?
(define set2bags
(lambda (randlist)
(cond ((null? randlist) '())
(else
(sort randlist)
(makepairs randlist)))))
(define makepairs
(lambda (inlist)
(let ((x 0)) ((newlist '()))
(cond ((zero? (car inlist)) '())
(else
(eq? (car inlist)(car (cdr inlist)))
(+ x 1)
(makepairs (cdr inlist))
(append newlist (cons (car inlist) x)))))))
Your current solution is incorrect - it doesn't even compile. Let's start again from scratch, using a named let for traversing the input list:
(define set2bags
(lambda (randlist)
(cond ((null? randlist) '())
(else (makepairs (sort randlist >))))))
(define makepairs
(lambda (inlist)
(let loop ((lst inlist)
(prv (car inlist))
(num 0)
(acc '()))
(cond ((null? lst)
(cons (list prv num) acc))
((= (car lst) prv)
(loop (cdr lst) prv (add1 num) acc))
(else
(loop (cdr lst) (car lst) 1 (cons (list prv num) acc)))))))
Now it works as expected:
(set2bags '(1 2 1 1 4 5))
=> '((1 3) (2 1) (4 1) (5 1))
The trick is keeping a counter for the cardinality (I called it num), and incrementing it as long as the same previous element (I named it prv) equals the current element. Whenever we find a different element, we add a new pair to the output list (called acc) and reset the previous element and the counter.
Your code is fairly hard to read without proper formating.
I notice a two branch cond, which is easier to read as an if.
In your else clause of set2bags, you call (sort randlist) but leave it as is. You actually want to use this in the next s-expression (makepairs (sort randlist))
So far a pretty good idea.
Now in makepairs you should have better abstraction, say let variables like-first and unlike-first. If the inlist is null, then the function should be the null list, else it's the pair with the car being the list of the car of like-first and the length of like-first and the cdr being the result of calling makepairs on the unlike-first list
(define (makepairs inlist)
(let ((like-first (filter (lambda (x) (equal? x (car inlist)) inlist))
(unlike-first (filter (lambda (x) (not (equal? x (car inlist))) inlist)))
(if (null? inlist)
'()
(cons (list (car inlist) (length like-first)) (makepairs unlike-first)))))
more effecient version
(define (makepairs inlist)
(if (null? inlist)
'()
(let loop ((firsts (list (car inlist)))
(but-firsts (cdr inlist)))
(if (or (null? but-firsts)
(not (equal? (car firsts) (car but-firsts))))
(cons (list (car firsts) (length firsts))
(makepairs but-firsts))
(loop (cons (car but-firsts) firsts) (cdr but-firsts))))))
]=> (makepairs (list 1 1 1 2 4 5))
;Value 17: ((1 3) (2 1) (4 1) (5 1))
If you have your own implementation of sort, say a mergesort you could write this right into the merge part for the best effeciency.
(define (set2bags lst)
(mergesort2bags lst <))
(define (mergesort2bags lst pred)
(let* ((halves (divide-evenly lst))
(first-half (car halves))
(other-half (cadr halves)))
(cond ((null? lst) '())
((null? (cdr lst)) (list (list (car lst) 1)))
(else
(merge-bags
(mergesort2bags first-half pred)
(mergesort2bags other-half pred)
pred)))))
(define (divide-evenly lst)
(let loop
((to-go lst)
(L1 '())
(l2 '()))
(if (null? to-go)
(list L1 L2)
(loop (cdr to-go) (cons (car to-go) L2) L1))))
(define (merge-bags L1 L2 pred)
(cond ((null? L1) L2)
((null? L2) L1)
((pred (caar L1) (caar L2))
(cons (car L1) (merge-bags (cdr L1) L2 pred)))
((equal? (caar L1) (caar L2))
(cons (list (caar L1) (+ (cadar L1) (cadar L2)))
(merge-bags (cdr L1) (cdr L2) pred)))
(else (cons (car L2) (merge-bags L1 (cdr L2) pred)))))
(mergesort2bags (list 1 2 1 1 4 5) <)
;Value 46: ((1 3) (2 1) (4 1) (5 1))
I'm thinking for very large datasets with a lot of repetition this method would pay off.
I wrote this code to create a list from en number of arguments given
(define (create-list . e)
e)
But I need it to remove any duplicated numbers from the list within this block itself.
I have tried and searched for hours and can't find a solution without placing dozens of lines of code on other blocks.
For example let's say my input is
(create-list . 2 2 3 5 5 )
I need the list created to be '(2 3 5) and not '(2 2 3 5 5 )...
The order of the numbers doesn't matter.
Basically, you need to do something like:
(define (create-list . e) (dedupe e))
I can think of a really simple but probably inefficient way to do this:
(define (dedupe e)
(if (null? e) '()
(cons (car e) (dedupe (filter (lambda (x) (not (equal? x (car e))))
(cdr e))))))
If you can't use existing functions like filter, you can make one yourself:
(define (my-filter pred ls)
(cond ((null? ls) '())
((pred (car ls)) (cons (car ls) (my-filter pred (cdr ls))))
(else (my-filter pred (cdr ls)))))
This one is faster:
(define (remove-duplicates l)
(cond ((null? l)
'())
((member (car l) (cdr l))
(remove-duplicates (cdr l)))
(else
(cons (car l) (remove-duplicates (cdr l))))))
But even better,
mit-scheme provides delete-duplicates, which does exactly what you want.
The most efficient (traversing the list once) way to do this is to define a function which goes through the list element-by-element. The function stores a list of which elements are already in the de-duped list.
An advantage of this solution over #Tikhon Jelvis's, is that the list elements don't need to be in order, to be deduplicated.
Given a function elem, which says if a is an element of l:
(define (elem? a l)
(cond ((null? l) #f)
((equal? a (car l)) #t)
(else (elem? a (cdr l)))))
We can traverse the list, storing each element we haven't seen before:
(define (de_dupe l_remaining already_contains)
(cond ((null? l_remaining) already_contains)
((elem? (car l_remaining) already_contains) (de_dupe (cdr l_remaining) already_contains))
(else (de_dupe (cdr l_remaining) (cons (car l_remaining) already_contains)))))
Note: for efficiency, this returns the elements in reverse order
(define (delete x)
(cond
((null? x) x)
((= (length x) 1) x) | ((null? (cdr x)) x)
((= (car x) (cadr x)) (delete (cdr x)))
(#t (cons (car x) (delete (cdr x))))
)
)
I'd like to create a Scheme function that yields true if it is passed a list that is composed entirely of identical elements. Such a list would be '(1 1 1 1). It would yield false with something like '(1 2 1 1).
This is what I have so far:
(define (list-equal? lst)
(define tmp (car lst))
(for-each (lambda (x)
(equal? x tmp))
lst)
)
Clearly this is incorrect, and I'm new to this. I guess I'm unable to express the step where I'm supposed to return #t or #f.
Thanks in advance!
EDIT:
I fiddled a bit and found a solution that seems to work very well, and with a minimal amount of code:
(define (list-equal? lst)
(andmap (lambda (x)
(equal? x (car lst)))
lst))
Thanks again for the help everyone.
Minimal amount of code, if you don't care that it only works for numbers:
(define (list-equel? lst)
(apply = lst))
Examples:
> (list-equel? '(1 1 2 1))
#f
> (list-equel? '(1 1 1 1))
#t
> (list-equel? '(1))
#t
The andmap solution is nice, but if andmap is not available, you can use this. It uses basic operations (and, or, null check, equality check) and handles empty lists and one element lists. Similar to Sean's implementation, but no helper definition is necessary.
(define (list-equal? args)
(or (or (null? args)
(null? (cdr args)))
(and (eq? (car args) (cadr args))
(list-equal? (cdr args)))))
Try something like this:
(define (list-equal? lst)
(define (helper el lst)
(or (null? lst)
(and (eq? el (car lst))
(helper (car lst) (cdr lst)))))
(or (null? lst)
(helper (car lst) (cdr lst))))
This might not be the cleanest implementation, but I think it will correctly handle the cases of empty lists and one-element lists.
In R6RS there's the for-all function, which takes a predicate and a list, and returns #t if the predicate returns true for all elements in the list and #f otherwise, which is exactly what you need here.
So if you're using R6RS (or any other scheme dialect that has the for-all function), you can just replace for-each with for-all in your code and it will work.
(define (list-equal? lst)
(if (= (cdr lst) null)
true
(and (equal? (car lst) (cadr lst))
(list-equal? (cdr lst)))))
Something like this should work:
(define (list-equal? lst)
(cond ((< (length lst) 2) #t)
(#t (and (equal? (car lst) (cadr lst))
(list-equal? (cdr lst))))))
The other answers in this thread all seem too complicated (I read through them all), so here's my take on it:
(define (all-equal? lst)
(define item (car lst))
(let next ((lst (cdr lst)))
(cond ((null? lst) #t)
((equal? item (car lst)) (next (cdr lst)))
(else #f))))
(It does not work with an empty list, by design. It's easy to add a (if (null? lst) #t ...) if necessary.)
A short, concise solution:
#lang racket
(define (all-equal? lst)
(for/and
([i (in-permutations lst)])
(equal? (first i) (second i))))
; TEST CASES
(require rackunit)
(check-false (all-equal? '(1 2 3)))
(check-true (all-equal? '(1 1 1)))
(check-true (all-equal? '()))
Note that this uses racket, so this may not work with your scheme implementation.
Yet another solution:
(define (all-same ls)
(cond
((or (null? ls)
(null? (cdr ls))) #t)
(else (and (equal? (car ls) (next ls))
(all-same (cdr ls)))))))
(define (next ls)
(cond
((or (null? ls)
(null? (cdr ls))) '())
(else (cadr ls)))))
For is bad in these languages. Try
(define list-equal?
(lambda (lst)
(if (= lst null)
(true)
(foldr = (car lst) (cdr lst))
)))