I want to create a list of lists in NetLogo. What I have is the following:
let a []
let b []
let c []
let d []
let l-o-l list [a b c d]
But then I get :
LIST expected 2 inputs on the right or any inputs when surrounded by parentheses.
with the list highlighted.
But when I change the last line to let l-o-l list (a b c d),I have the b highlighted with Expected closing parenthesis.
I am confused!
Close! What you want is
(list a b c d)
When there is more than the normal number of inputs, it is the whole expression that is enclosed, including the list reporter.
Related
Write a function to split a list into two lists. The length of the first part is specified by the caller.
I am new to Elm so I am not sure if my reasoning is correct. I think that I need to transform the input list in an array so I am able to slice it by the provided input number. I am struggling a bit with the syntax as well. Here is my code so far:
listSplit: List a -> Int -> List(List a)
listSplit inputList nr =
let myArray = Array.fromList inputList
in Array.slice 0 nr myArray
So I am thinking to return a list containing 2 lists(first one of the specified length), but I am stuck in the syntax. How can I fix this?
Alternative implementation:
split : Int -> List a -> (List a, List a)
split i xs =
(List.take i xs, List.drop i xs)
I'll venture a simple recursive definition, since a big part of learning functional programming is understanding recursion (which foldl is just an abstraction of):
split : Int -> List a -> (List a, List a)
split splitPoint inputList =
splitHelper splitPoint inputList []
{- We use a typical trick here, where we define a helper function
that requires some additional arguments. -}
splitHelper : Int -> List a -> List a -> (List a, List a)
splitHelper splitPoint inputList leftSplitList =
case inputList of
[] ->
-- This is a base case, we end here if we ran out of elements
(List.reverse leftSplitList, [])
head :: tail ->
if splitPoint > 0 then
-- This is the recursive case
-- Note the typical trick here: we are shuffling elements
-- from the input list and putting them onto the
-- leftSplitList.
-- This will reverse the list, so we need to reverse it back
-- in the base cases
splitHelper (splitPoint - 1) tail (head :: leftSplitList)
else
-- here we got to the split point,
-- so the rest of the list is the output
(List.reverse leftSplitList, inputList)
Use List.foldl
split : Int -> List a -> (List a, List a)
split i xs =
let
f : a -> (List a, List a) -> (List a, List a)
f x (p, q) =
if List.length p >= i then
(p, q++[x])
else
(p++[x], q)
in
List.foldl f ([], []) xs
When list p reaches the desired length, append element x to the second list q.
Append element x to list p otherwise.
Normally in Elm, you use List for a sequence of values. Array is used specifically for fast indexing access.
When dealing with lists in functional programming, try to think in terms of map, filter, and fold. They should be all you need.
To return a pair of something (e.g. two lists), use tuple. Elm supports tuples of up to three elements.
Additionally, there is a function splitAt in the List.Extra package that does exactly the same thing, although it is better to roll your own for the purpose of learning.
I wonder whether it's possible to give a name to the output of a certain expression to retrieve it from the graph at another part of the code.
For example
def A(a, b):
c = a + b
d = d * a
return d
For debug purposes it would be nice if I could pull out c at another position without returning it through the entire function hierarchy.
Any ideas?
Thanks in advance!
I'm assuming a and b are tensors.
Either you give a name to c using tf.identity
def A(a, b):
c = a + b
c = tf.identity(c, name = "c")
d = d * a
return d
Either you use the tf.add operation instead of +:
def A(a, b):
tf.add(a, b, name = "c")
d = d * a
return d
Either way, you get retrieve c with tf.get_variable('c:0') (You might need to precise the scope if any.)
I have a Clojure function:
(def obseq
(fn []
(let [a 0
b 1
c 2]
(println (seq '(a b c))))))
It outputs :
(a b c)
I want it to output a sequence containing the values of a, b, and c, not their names.
Desired output:
(1 2 3)
How do I implement this?
Short answer:
clj.core=> (defn obseq []
(let [a 0
b 1
c 2]
(println [a b c])))
#'clj.core/obseq
clj.core=> (obseq)
[0 1 2]
nil
Long answer:
Quoting a form like '(a b c) recursively prevents any evaluation inside the quoted form. So, the values for your 3 symbols a, b, and c aren't substituted. It is much easier to use a vector (square brackets), which never needs to be quoted (unlike a list). Since the vector is unquoted, the 3 symbols are evaluated and replaced by their values.
If you wanted it to stay a list for some reason, the easiest way is to type:
clj.core=> (defn obseq [] (let [a 0 b 1 c 2] (println (list a b c))))
#'clj.core/obseq
clj.core=> (obseq)
(0 1 2)
nil
This version also has no quoting, so the 3 symbols are replaced with their values. Then the function (list ...) puts them into a list data structure.
Note that I also converted your (def obseq (fn [] ...)) into the preferred form (defn obseq [] ...), which has the identical result but is shorter and (usually) clearer.
I've some variables, Lets say a, b, c, d. All belongs to a fixed interval [0, e]
Now i've some relations between them like
a > b
a > c
b > d
Something like this; I want to make a function which print all the possible cases for this.
Example:
a b c d
a c b d
a b d c
a c b d
In essence, what you have is a directed acyclic graph.
A relatively simple approach is to store, for each variable, a set of the variables that must precede them. (In your example, this storage would map b to {a}, c to {a}, and d to {b}.) You can then write a recursive function that generates all valid tails consisting of a subset of these variables (in your case, for example, the subset {c,d} produces two valid tails: [c,d] and [d,c]). This recursive function examines each variable in the subset and determines whether its prerequisites are already met. (For example, since b maps to {a}, any subset including both a and b cannot produce a tail that begins with b.) If so, then it can recursively call itself on the subset excluding that variable.
There are some optimizations you can then perform, if desired. For example, you can use dynamic programming to avoid repeatedly re-computing the set of valid tails for the same subset.
I have a some OCaml code that finds all combinations of change given a change amount. I have most of the code working, however I am not able to figure out how this recursive function will actually return the possible change combinations.
let change_combos presidents =
let rec change amount coinlist = match amount with
|0 -> [[]] (*exits when nothing*)
|_ when (amount < 0) -> [] (*exits when less than 0*)
|_ -> match coinlist with
|[] -> [] (*Returns empty list, exits program*)
(*h::f -> something, using [25;10;5;1] aka all change combinations...*)
(*using recursion, going through all combinations and joining lists returned together*)
let print_the_coin_matrix_for_all_our_joy enter_the_matrix =
print_endline (join "\n" (List.map array_to_string enter_the_matrix));;
Thanks for the help, let me know if I need to clarify something :)
It is a bit confusing what you're looking for. I believe that you want to generate a list of all the combinations of a list? You should think about the recursion and how to generate the individual elements. Start with the input type, and how you'd generate successive elements by reducing the problem space.
let rec generate lst = match lst with
| [] -> []
| h::t -> [h] :: (List.map (fun x -> h::x) (generate t)) # (generate t)
If the list is [] there are no combinations. If we have an element we generate all combinations without that element and base our construction on that assumption. The components fall into place at this point. Concatenate the list of combinations of t with the combinations of t and h cons'd onto each and a singleton of h.