On Dec 27, 2013, at 6:27 PM, Scott Klarenbach wrote:
> I noticed that MIT Scheme has the "pp" procedure which prints the source code > of a given function. Is there an equivalent way to do this in Racket? No. The 'pp' idea probably dates back to the age of Lisp-machine repls when MIT programmers thought that you enter functions into the repl and the program is the current state of the repl. Since definitions for large programs scroll off the visible screen, you need pp. > More generally, I'm looking to normalize nested procedures to their most > rudimentary expressions. This might be a MIT misunderstanding about the relationship between Scheme and the lambda calculus. It is certainly not possible in general and I see no pragmatic use case for an approximation. -- Matthias > > For example: > > (define (something? x) (> x 3)) > (define (something-else? x) (< x 10)) > (define (combined x) (and (something? x) (something-else? x))) > > (normalize combined) => > '(lambda (x) (and (> x 3) (< x 10))) > > ((normalize combined) 7) => #t > > I'm sure it's not so simple and a robust general solution involves some type > of beta reduction and/or argument constraints, but I'm just looking for a > nudge in the right direction. > > Thanks. > > > > > -- > Talk to you soon, > > Scott Klarenbach > > PointyHat Software Corp. > www.pointyhat.ca > p 604-568-4280 > e sc...@pointyhat.ca > 200-1575 W. Georgia > Vancouver, BC V6G2V3 > > _______________________________________ > To iterate is human; to recur, divine > ____________________ > Racket Users list: > http://lists.racket-lang.org/users
____________________ Racket Users list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/users
