I agree with Greg (itistoday). If you hand the reins over to him, it will be in good hands.
Hopefully you can contact Lutz and get an approval. WDYT?
Best, Rick (rickyboy)
- Welcome to newLISP Fan Club.
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
#1
newLISP newS / Re: I'd like to offer to take over these forums
February 21, 2023, 12:06:26 PMI agree with Greg (itistoday). If you hand the reins over to him, it will be in good hands.
Hopefully you can contact Lutz and get an approval. WDYT?
Best, Rick (rickyboy)
#2
So, what can you actually DO with newLISP? / Re: Cryptarithmetic
March 29, 2022, 05:38:32 PMI found the same 3 you found. I wish I could post them here but alas I'm getting the Internal Server Error page; so I'll just post a link to the code. The solution printout is in a comment at the bottom.
Like Ralph, I could not think of anything besides brute-force, but I added a little wrinkle that reduced the number of iterations by 6 times, so that it would run faster and, for that reason, wouldn't be "too boring." :)
#3
newLISP in the real world / Re: "Code patterns" translation
August 20, 2021, 09:09:45 AM #4
Anything else we might add? / Re: (read-expr "08") reads octal?
June 04, 2021, 02:02:49 PM #5
newLISP in the real world / Re: List of indexes
May 12, 2021, 12:13:28 PMCode Select
(define (get-indices L (child 0) (parents '()) (result '()))
(if (empty? L)
result
(get-indices (1 L) (+ 1 child) parents
(append
(snoc result (snoc parents child))
(if (list? (L 0))
(get-indices (L 0) 0 (snoc parents child))
'())))))
#6
newLISP in the real world / Re: List of indexes
May 12, 2021, 12:12:54 PMCode Select
(define (get-indices L (child 0) (parents '()) (result '()))
(if (empty? L)
result
(list? (L 0))
(get-indices (1 L) (+ 1 child) parents
(append (snoc result (snoc parents child))
(get-indices (L 0) 0 (snoc parents child))))
(get-indices (1 L) (+ 1 child) parents
(snoc result (snoc parents child)))))
You will need this utility function,
Code Select
(define (snoc xs x) (push x xs -1))
#7
newLISP in the real world / Re: Code Lisp-ish enough??
May 01, 2021, 04:28:41 AM
I tried this, unpretentious:https://controlc.com/10370640">https://controlc.com/10370640
This is much easier to read!
#8
newLISP in the real world / Re: IDE for newLISP
April 10, 2021, 08:09:12 AM- The source code
:)
#9
Whither newLISP? / Re: "place" in the function "inc"
January 01, 2021, 11:09:12 AM
That doesn't make any sense [...] and wanted to learn more Lisp, but this version is full of these incomprehensible "gimmicks" that make it very difficult to work out how to use it!
Well, the OP was really asking about a very obscure "corner case" usage of `inc` to accomplish the task of `sum` and it's definitely not a normal usage (which is why you couldn't find it in the manual).
When, I first saw this many years ago, I had already been programming for many years in newLISP and didn't even know about it. OTOH, it didn't affect my programming use cases at all (and probably nobody else's), because there is an idiomatic way to accomplish the same thing.
If you want to learn about how to define and use functions that "have memory" (like `sum`), consult the manual here:
Code Select > (define (sum:sum x) (inc sum:current-total x))
(lambda (x) (inc sum:current-total x))
> (sum 1)
1
> (sum 1)
2
> (sum 2)
4
> (sum 3)
7
>And the function definition has not been altered (per your requirement):
Code Select > sum:sum
(lambda (x) (inc sum:current-total x))
>
Also, why does the example have a 0 after the x in the parameter list for sum?
I can leave that out and the function still works!
That's just newLISP's way of setting a default value for a function parameter, to be used if the caller doesn't supply an argument value for it. Many languages have this feature. newLISP documents this fact in its manual here:
I hope you stick around and continue to use newLISP. It is a very fun language! Happy hacking!
#11
newLISP in the real world / Re: running a nL on nearlyfreespeech
August 25, 2020, 06:34:57 AM #12
newLISP in the real world / Re: values into mul
October 11, 2019, 04:40:14 PMCode Select (println (mul 2 (read-expr abc))) #13
newLISP in the real world / Re: Timing function problem
September 20, 2019, 10:30:55 AMOver time envrironment and stack memory gets fragmented by certain functions. The error forces a total low level freeing and reallocation of this memory. There is nothing we can do about it without slowing down everywhere, but it is a rare enough problem. Until now, I have never seen this before.Quote from: "Lutz"
Thanks, Lutz!
#14
newLISP in the real world / Re: Timing function problem
September 20, 2019, 06:36:34 AM #15
newLISP in the real world / Re: Timing function problem
September 20, 2019, 05:44:15 AM@rickyboy and @ralph.ronnquist
Sorry, I didn't explain myself well. The function i tried was "merge" with temporary heap function.
Yes, you are correct. I remember testing this myself before I first posted here (as I had the same idea as Ralph). I ruled that out as a possibility when I saw what you saw: the timings still grew. And that's why in my first post, I was willing to guess that the blame is the very large call stack (because the input lists were large enough). That's why in my second post, I reported that much smaller input lists don't seem to exhibit the problem.
Then I saw Ralph's "let helper function" function, and I glossed over it (thinking, "yeah, I tried that; not gonna work") and I got stuck on his sort-based function (because my thought was "oh yeah, duh; good one") and to me THAT was "Ralph's function". :) (In my view, the let-helper version wasn't his serious submission; he was using it as a vehicle to get us to investigate that avenue ourselves, like a good teacher who will not do all the work for his students. ;)
However, as I said, I still don't know what causes this issue. I'm hoping that Lutz (there it is: I used the L word :) or another kind soul will look into it, because it looks to me to be more of a bug than a feature.