Search Results

Search found 14176 results on 568 pages for 'functional programming'.

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

Page 86/568 | < Previous Page | 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93  | Next Page >

  • True / false evaluation doesn't work as expected in Scheme

    - by ron
    I'm trying to compare two booleans : (if (equal? #f (string->number "123b")) "not a number" "indeed a number") When I run this in the command line of DrRacket I get "not a number" , however , when I put that piece of code in my larger code , the function doesn't return that string ("not a number") , here's the code : (define (testing x y z) (define badInput "ERROR") (if (equal? #f (string->number "123b")) "not a number" "indeed a number") (display x)) And from command line : (testing "123" 1 2) displays : 123 Why ? Furthermore , how can I return a value , whenever I choose ? Here is my "real" problem : I want to do some input check to the input of the user , but the thing is , that I want to return the error message if I need , before the code is executed , because if won't - then I would run the algorithm of my code for some incorrect input : (define (convert originalNumber s_oldBase s_newBase) (define badInput "ERROR") ; Input check - if one of the inputs is not a number then return ERROR (if (equal? #f (string->number originalNumber)) badInput) (if (equal? #f (string->number s_oldBase)) badInput) (if (equal? #f (string->number s_newBase)) badInput) (define oldBase (string->number s_oldBase)) (define newBase (string->number s_newBase)) (define outDecimal (convertIntoDecimal originalNumber oldBase)) (define result "") ; holds the new number (define remainder 0) ; remainder for each iteration (define whole 0) ; the whole number after dividing (define temp 0) (do() ((= outDecimal 0)) ; stop when the decimal value reaches 0 (set! whole (quotient outDecimal newBase)) ; calc the whole number (set! temp (* whole newBase)) (set! remainder (- outDecimal temp)) ; calc the remainder (set! result (appending result remainder)) ; append the result (set! outDecimal (+ whole 0)) ; set outDecimal = whole ) ; end of do (if (> 1 0) (string->number (list->string(reverse (string->list result))))) ) ;end of method This code won't work since it uses another method that I didn't attach to the post (but it's irrelevant to the problem . Please take a look at those three IF-s ... I want to return "ERROR" if the user put some incorrect value , for example (convert "23asb4" "b5" "9") Thanks

    Read the article

  • List filtering: list comprehension vs. lambda + filter

    - by Agos
    I happened to find myself having a basic filtering need: I have a list and I have to filter it by an attribute of the items. My code looked like this: list = [i for i in list if i.attribute == value] But then i thought, wouldn't it be better to write it like this? filter(lambda x: x.attribute == value, list) It's more readable, and if needed for performance the lambda could be taken out to gain something. Question is: are there any caveats in using the second way? Any performance difference? Am I missing the Pythonic Way™ entirely and should do it in yet another way (such as using itemgetter instead of the lambda)? Thanks in advance

    Read the article

  • What's the *right* way to handle a POST in FP?

    - by Malvolio
    I'm just getting started with FP and I'm using Scala, which may not be the best way, since I can always fall back to an imperative style if the going gets tough. I'd just rather not. I've got a very specific question that points to a broader lacuna in my understanding of FP. When a web application is processing a GET request, the user wants information that already exists on the web-site. The application only has to process and format the data in some way. The FB way is clear. When a web application is processing a POST request, the user wants change the information held on the site. True, the information is not typically held in application variables, it's in a database or a flat-file, but still, I get the feeling I'm not grokking FP properly. Is there a pattern for handling updates to static data in an FP language? My vague picture of this is that the application is handed the request and the then-current site state. The application does its thing and returns the new site-state. If the current site-state hasn't changed since the application started, the new state becomes the current state and the reply is sent back to the browser (this is my dim image of Clojure's style); if the current state has been changed (by another thread, well, something else happens ...

    Read the article

  • How to cast a character to int in Clojure?

    - by Learning Clojure
    How to cast a character to int in Clojure? I am trying to write a rot 13 in clojure, so I need to have something to cast my char to int. I found something called (int), so I put: (int a) Get: CompilerException java.lang.RuntimeException: Unable to resolve symbol: a in this context, compiling:(NO_SOURCE_PATH:13:1) Then I put: (int 'a) Get: ClassCastException clojure.lang.Symbol cannot be cast to java.lang.Character clojure.lang.RT.intCast (RT.java:1087) Then: (rot13 ''a') Get: ClassCastException clojure.lang.PersistentList cannot be cast to java.lang.Character clojure.lang.RT.intCast (RT.java:1087) And: (rot13 "a") Get: ClassCastException java.lang.String cannot be cast to java.lang.Character clojure.lang.RT.intCast (RT.java:1087) So what is the right way to do it? btw, I always get confused with all these clojure syntax. But I can never find any source only help me with my problem. Any suggestions? Thank you!!

    Read the article

  • Haskell: Why is it saying my function type is off?

    - by linkmaster03
    I wrote a little Haskell program to find the area of a triangle, primarily to practice custom types, but it keeps throwing the following error on compile: areafinder.hs:7:4: Couldn't match expected type 'Triangle' against inferred type 'm b' In a stmt of a 'do' expression: putStr "Base: " In the expression: do { putStr "Base: "; baseStr I'm not sure where 'm b' comes from, so I'm at a loss here. Why is it throwing this error, and what can I do to fix it? Here is my code: module Main where data Triangle = Triangle Double Double -- base, height getTriangle :: Triangle getTriangle = do putStr "Base: " baseStr Double calcTriangle (Triangle base height) = base * height main = putStrLn ("Area = " ++ show (calcTriangle getTriangle)) Thanks. :)

    Read the article

  • Is it possible to create a C++ factory system that can create an instance of any "registered" object

    - by chrensli
    Hello, I've spent my entire day researching this topic, so it is with some scattered knowledge on the topic that i come to you with this inquiry. Please allow me to describe what I am attempting to accomplish, and maybe you can either suggest a solution to the immediate question, or another way to tackle the problem entirely. I am trying to mimic something related to how XAML files work in WPF, where you are essentially instantiating an object tree from an XML definition. If this is incorrect, please inform. This issue is otherwise unrelated to WPF, C#, or anything managed - I solely mention it because it is a similar concept.. So, I've created an XML parser class already, and generated a node tree based on ObjectNode objects. ObjectNode objects hold a string value called type, and they have an std::vector of child ObjectNode objects. The next step is to instantiate a tree of objects based on the data in the ObjectNode tree. This intermediate ObjectNode tree is needed because the same ObjectNode tree might be instantiated multiple times or delayed as needed. The tree of objects that is being created is such that the nodes in the tree are descendants of a common base class, which for now we can refer to as MyBase. Leaf nodes can be of any type, not necessarily derived from MyBase. To make this more challenging, I will not know what types of MyBase derived objects might be involved, so I need to allow for new types to be registered with the factory. I am aware of boost's factory. Their docs have an interesting little design paragraph on this page: o We may want a factory that takes some arguments that are forwarded to the constructor, o we will probably want to use smart pointers, o we may want several member functions to create different kinds of objects, o we might not necessarily need a polymorphic base class for the objects, o as we will see, we do not need a factory base class at all, o we might want to just call the constructor - without #new# to create an object on the stack, and o finally we might want to use customized memory management. I might not be understanding this all correctly, but that seems to state that what I'm trying to do can be accomplished with boost's factory. But all the examples I've located, seem to describe factories where all objects are derived from a base type. Any guidance on this would be greatly appreciated. Thanks for your time!

    Read the article

  • std::out_of_range error?

    - by vette982
    I'm dealing with a file with a linked list of lines with each node looking like this: struct TextLine{ //The actual text string text; //The line number of the document int line_num; //A pointer to the next line TextLine * next; }; and I'm writing a function that adds spaces at the beginning of the lines found in the variable text, by calling functions like linelist_ptr->text.insert(0,1,'\t'); The program compiles, but when I run it I get this error: terminate called after throwing an instance of 'std::out_of_range' what(): basic_string::at Aborted Any ideas?

    Read the article

  • Haskell: How to compose `not` with a function of arbitrary arity?

    - by Hynek -Pichi- Vychodil
    When I have some function of type like f :: (Ord a) => a -> a -> Bool f a b = a > b I should like make function which wrap this function with not. e.g. make function like this g :: (Ord a) => a -> a -> Bool g a b = not $ f a b I can make combinator like n f = (\a -> \b -> not $ f a b) But I don't know how. *Main> let n f = (\a -> \b -> not $ f a b) n :: (t -> t1 -> Bool) -> t -> t1 -> Bool Main> :t n f n f :: (Ord t) => t -> t -> Bool *Main> let g = n f g :: () -> () -> Bool What am I doing wrong? And bonus question how I can do this for function with more and lest parameters e.g. t -> Bool t -> t1 -> Bool t -> t1 -> t2 -> Bool t -> t1 -> t2 -> t3 -> Bool

    Read the article

  • Permuting output of a tree of closures

    - by yan
    This a conceptual question on how one would implement the following in Lisp (assuming Common Lisp in my case, but any dialect would work). Assume you have a function that creates closures that sequentially iterate over an arbitrary collection (or otherwise return different values) of data and returns nil when exhausted, i.e. (defun make-counter (up-to) (let ((cnt 0)) (lambda () (if (< cnt up-to) (incf cnt) nil)))) CL-USER> (defvar gen (make-counter 3)) GEN CL-USER> (funcall gen) 1 CL-USER> (funcall gen) 2 CL-USER> (funcall gen) 3 CL-USER> (funcall gen) NIL CL-USER> (funcall gen) NIL Now, assume you are trying to permute a combinations of one or more of these closures. How would you implement a function that returns a new closure that subsequently creates a permutation of all closures contained within it? i.e.: (defun permute-closures (counters) ......) such that the following holds true: CL-USER> (defvar collection (permute-closures (list (make-counter 3) (make-counter 3)))) CL-USER> (funcall collection) (1 1) CL-USER> (funcall collection) (1 2) CL-USER> (funcall collection) (1 3) CL-USER> (funcall collection) (2 1) ... and so on. The way I had it designed originally was to add a 'pause' parameter to the initial counting lambda such that when iterating you can still call it and receive the old cached value if passed ":pause t", in hopes of making the permutation slightly cleaner. Also, while the example above is a simple list of two identical closures, the list can be an arbitrarily-complicated tree (which can be permuted in depth-first order, and the resulting permutation set would have the shape of the tree.). I had this implemented, but my solution wasn't very clean and am trying to poll how others would approach the problem. Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • Heap Algorithmic Issue

    - by OberynMarDELL
    I am having this algorithmic problem that I want to discuss about. Its not about find a solution but about optimization in terms of runtime. So here it is: Suppose we have a race court of Length L and a total of N cars that participate on the race. The race rules are simple. Once a car overtakes an other car the second car is eliminated from the race. The race ends when no more overtakes are possible to happen. The tricky part is that the k'th car has a starting point x[k] and a velocity v[k]. The points are given in an ascending order, but the velocities may differ. What I've done so far: Given that a car can get overtaken only by its previous, I calculated the time that it takes for each car to reach its next one t = (x[i] - x[i+1])/(v[i] - v[i+1]) and I insert these times onto a min heap in O(n log n). So in theory I have to pop the first element in O(logn), find its previous, pop it as well , update its time and insert it in the heap once more, much like a priority queue. My main problem is how I can access specific points of a heap in O(log n) or faster in order to keep the complexity in O(n log n) levels. This program should be written on Haskell so I would like to keep things simple as far as possible EDIT: I Forgot to write the actual point of the race. The goal is to find the order in which cars exit the game

    Read the article

  • How can I map a String to a function in Java?

    - by Bears will eat you
    Currently, I have a bunch of Java classes that implement a Processor interface, meaning they all have a processRequest(String key) method. The idea is that each class has a few (say, <10) member Strings, and each of those maps to a method in that class via the processRequest method, like so: class FooProcessor implements Processor { String key1 = "abc"; String key2 = "def"; String key3 = "ghi"; // and so on... String processRequest(String key) { String toReturn = null; if (key1.equals(key)) toReturn = method1(); else if (key2.equals(key)) toReturn = method2(); else if (key3.equals(key)) toReturn = method3(); // and so on... return toReturn; } String method1() { // do stuff } String method2() { // do other stuff } String method3() { // do other other stuff } // and so on... } You get the idea. This was working fine for me, but now I need a runtime-accessible mapping from key to function; not every function actually returns a String (some return void) and I need to dynamically access the return type (using reflection) of each function in each class that there's a key for. I already have a manager that knows about all the keys, but not the mapping from key to function. My first instinct was to replace this mapping using if-else statements with a Map<String, Function>, like I could do in Javascript. But, Java doesn't support first-class functions so I'm out of luck there. I could probably dig up a third-party library that lets me work with first-class functions, but I haven't seen any yet, and I doubt that I need an entire new library. I also thought of putting these String keys into an array and using reflection to invoke the methods by name, but I see two downsides to this method: My keys would have to be named the same as the method - or be named in a particular, consistent way so that it's easy to map them to the method name. This seems WAY slower than the if-else statements I have right now. Efficiency is something of a concern because these methods will tend to get called pretty frequently, and I want to minimize unnecessary overhead. TL; DR: I'm looking for a clean, minimal-overhead way to map a String to some sort of a Function object that I can invoke and call (something like) getReturnType() on. I don't especially mind using a 3rd-party library if it really fits my needs. I also don't mind using reflection, though I would strongly prefer to avoid using reflection every single time I do a method lookup - maybe using some caching strategy that combines the Map with reflection. Thoughts on a good way to get what I want? Cheers!

    Read the article

  • Make All Types Constant by Default in C++

    - by Jon Purdy
    What is the simplest and least obtrusive way to indicate to the compiler, whether by means of compiler options, #defines, typedefs, or templates, that every time I say T, I really mean T const? I would prefer not to make use of an external preprocessor. Since I don't use the mutable keyword, that would be acceptable to repurpose to indicate mutable state. Potential (suboptimal) solutions so far: // I presume redefinition of keywords is implementation-defined or illegal. #define int int const #define ptr * const int i(0); int ptr j(&i); typedef int const Int; typedef int const* const Intp; Int i(0); Intp j(&i); template<class T> struct C { typedef T const type; typedef T const* const ptr; }; C<int>::type i(0); C<int>::ptr j(&i);

    Read the article

  • Dividing a list in specific number of sublists

    - by Surya
    I want to divide a list in "a specific number of" sublists. That is, for example if I have a list List(34, 11, 23, 1, 9, 83, 5) and the number of sublists expected is 3 then I want List(List(34, 11), List(23, 1), List(9, 83, 5)). How do I go about doing this? I tried grouped but it doesn't seem to be doing what I want. PS: This is not a homework question. Kindly give a direct solution instead of some vague suggestions.

    Read the article

  • Using enum values to represent binary operators (or functions)

    - by Bears will eat you
    I'm looking for an elegant way to use values in a Java enum to represent operations or functions. My guess is, since this is Java, there just isn't going to be a nice way to do it, but here goes anyway. My enum looks something like this: public enum Operator { LT, LTEQ, EQEQ, GT, GTEQ, NEQ; ... } where LT means < (less than), LTEQ means <= (less than or equal to), etc - you get the idea. Now I want to actually use these enum values to apply an operator. I know I could do this just using a whole bunch of if-statements, but that's the ugly, OO way, e.g.: int a = ..., b = ...; Operator foo = ...; // one of the enum values if (foo == Operator.LT) { return a < b; } else if (foo == Operator.LTEQ) { return a <= b; } else if ... // etc What I'd like to be able to do is cut out this structure and use some sort of first-class function or even polymorphism, but I'm not really sure how. Something like: int a = ..., b = ...; Operator foo = ...; return foo.apply(a, b); or even int a = ..., b = ...; Operator foo = ...; return a foo.convertToOperator() b; But as far as I've seen, I don't think it's possible to return an operator or function (at least, not without using some 3rd-party library). Any suggestions?

    Read the article

  • What advantage does Monad give us over an Applicative?

    - by arrowdodger
    I've read this article, but didn't understand last section. The author says that Monad gives us context sensitivity, but it's possible to achieve the same result using only an Applicative instance: let maybeAge = (\futureYear birthYear -> if futureYear < birthYear then yearDiff birthYear futureYear else yearDiff futureYear birthYear) <$> (readMay futureYearString) <*> (readMay birthYearString) It's uglier for sure, but beside that I don't see why we need Monad. Can anyone clear this up for me?

    Read the article

  • Cartesian Plane

    - by NuNu
    I'm trying to define a function in Haskell that takes an integer argument c and returns the list of all points on the cartesian plane of the form (x/c,y/c) where x and y are integers. x/c is between -2 and 1 and y/r is between -1 and 1 This is what I've gotten so far which I'm almost sure is right but I'm getting a parse error on input = when I run it particularly at this line: cart xs ys c = [(y/c,x/c) | x <- xs, y <- ys] plane :: Int -> [a] plane c = cart [-1*c .. 1*c] [-2*c .. 1*c] c cart xs ys c = [(y/c,x/c) | x <- xs, y <- ys] A sample output would be: plane 1 would generate: [(-2.0, -1.0), (-1.0, -1.0), ( 0.0, -1.0), ( 1.0, -1.0), (-2.0, 0.0), (-1.0, 0.0), ( 0.0, 0.0), ( 1.0, 0.0), (-2.0, 1.0), (-1.0, 1.0), ( 0.0, 1.0), ( 1.0, 1.0)] Anyone have any idea how I can fix this! Thanks

    Read the article

  • Abort early in a fold

    - by Heptic
    What's the best way to terminate a fold early? As a simplified example, imagine I want to sum up the numbers in an Iterable, but if I encounter something I'm not expecting (say an odd number) I might want to terminate. This is a first approximation def sumEvenNumbers(nums: Iterable[Int]): Option[Int] = { nums.foldLeft (Some(0): Option[Int]) { case (None, _) => None case (Some(s), n) if n % 2 == 0 => Some(s + n) case (Some(_), _) => None } } However, this solution is pretty ugly (as in, if I did a .foreach and a return -- it'd be much cleaner and clearer) and worst of all, it traverses the entire iterable even if it encounters a non-even number. So what would be the best way to write a fold like this, that terminates early? Should I just go and write this recursively, or is there a more accepted way?

    Read the article

  • How do I code a tree of objects in Haskell with pointers to parent and children?

    - by axilmar
    I've got the following problem: I have a tree of objects of different classes where an action in the child class invalidates the parent. In imperative languages, it is trivial to do. For example, in Java: public class A { private List<B> m_children = new LinkedList<B>(); private boolean m_valid = true; public void invalidate() { m_valid = false; } public void addChild(B child) { m_children.add(child); child.m_parent = this; } } public class B { public A m_parent = null; private int m_data = 0; public void setData(int data) { m_data = 0; m_parent.invalidate(); } } public class Main { public static void main(String[] args) { A a = new A(); B b = new B(); b.setData(0); //invalidates A } } How do I do the above in Haskell? I cannot wrap my mind around this, since once I construct an object in Haskell, it cannot be changed. I would be much obliged if the relevant Haskell code is posted.

    Read the article

  • How can I bind the second argument in a function but not the first (in an elegant way)?

    - by Frank Osterfeld
    Is there a way in Haskell to bind the second argument but not the first of a function without using lambda functions or defining another "local" function? Example. I have a binary function like: sub :: Int -> Int -> Int sub x y = x - y Now if I want to bind the first argument, I can do so easily using (sub someExpression): mapSubFrom5 x = map (sub 5) x *Main> mapSubFrom5 [1,2,3,4,5] [4,3,2,1,0] That works fine if I want to bind the first n arguments without "gap". If I want to bind the second argument but not the first, the two options I am aware of are more verbose: Either via another, local, function: mapSub5 x = map sub5 x where sub5 x = sub x 5 *Main> mapSub5 [1,2,3,4,5] [-4,-3,-2,-1,0] Or using lambda: mapSub5 x = map (\x -> sub x 5) x While both are working fine, I like the elegance of "sub 5" and wonder if there is a similarly elegant way to bind the n-th (n 1) argument of a function?

    Read the article

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

< Previous Page | 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93  | Next Page >