Exercise 1.1 asks us to evaluate a series of simple Scheme expressions. I strongly advise anyone working along to input each expression to a Scheme interpreter to see how they evaluate for yourself.

Exercise 1.2 asks us to translate the following formula to prefix notation.

Checking with a calculator, I find that this expression evaluates to -37/150. The same expression in prefix notation would be

`(/ (+ 5 4 (- 2 (- 3 (+ 6 (/ 4 5)))))`

(* 3 (- 6 2) (- 2 7)))

You can check with a Scheme interpreter to verify that this expression also evaluates to -37/150.Exercise 1.3 asks us to define a procedure that takes three numbers as arguments and returns the sum of the squares of the two larger numbers.

It's easy to define this procedure using the built-in Scheme procedures square, max, and min, as I did here. However, we haven't encountered these procedures yet, so I think we should define them as well.

The sum-of-highest-squares works by adding the square of the maximum of x and y (not the lowest of the three) and the square of the maximum of the remaining two (the minimum of x and y, which will be whichever value was left over from the first step), and z.`(define (square x)`

(* x x))

(define (max x y)

(if (> x y) x y))`(define (min x y)`

(if (< x y) x y))

`(define (sum-of-highest-squares x y z)`

(+ (square (max x y))

(square (max (min x y) z))))

Exercise 1.4 asks us to describe the behavior of the following procedure.

`(define (a-plus-abs-b a b)`

((if (> b 0) + -) a b))

Before the entire expression can be evaluated, the compound if expression must be evaluated so the interpreter can determine whether the + or - operator should be applied to the two operands a and b. If b i greater than 0, the + operator is applied, adding a positive value to a. Otherwise, the - operator is applied, subtracting a negative value. In either case, the result is the same. The absolute value of b is added to a.Exercise 1.5 asks us to compare the behavior of the following two procedures when they're interpreted using applicative-order evaluation vs. normal-order evaluation.

`(define (p) (p))`

(define (test x y)

(if (= x 0)

0

y))

The first procedure simply makes a recursive call to itself. If you evaluate (p) directly in the Scheme interpreter, it will never return because each recursive call makes another recursive call with no base case defined. The test procedure is used to determine the evaluation order of the interpreter by running it with the recursive procedure as its second argument.If the interpreter uses applicative-order evaluation (as we learned in section 1.1.5 of the text, is the case), the very first expression the interpreter sees

`(test 0 (p))`

has one operand and two arguments, all of which will be evaluated. The operand test will evaluate to the body of its procedure, the symbol 0 will evaluate to its value, and the operand (p) will evaluate to a recursive call to itself, which will never stop recursing.If the interpreter uses normal-order evaluation, the (p) operand will not be evaluated until its value is needed. This is because when using normal-order evaluation the interpreter will substitute operand expressions for parameters. Since the conditional statement in the body is structured such that the second argument never needs to be evaluated, the entire test procedure will evaluate to 0 under normal-order evaluation.

Related:

For links to all of the SICP lecture notes and exercises that I've done so far, see The SICP Challenge.

## 2 comments:

In Exercise 1.3 why not just do max(x y) and then the max(y z)? Am I missing any use case if I do it this way?

This is my solution:

(define (square x) (* x x))

(define (sum-of-squares x y) (+ (square x) (square y)))

(define (max x y) (if (>= x y) x y))

(define (sum-of-squares-of-two-larger-numbers x y z) (sum-of-squares (max x y) (max y z)))

Varun,

If y is the maximum of the three values, that will give you the sum of the square of y and y.

Post a Comment