This assignment uses the functional aspects of Scheme to construct a relatively simple but non-trivial program. Once you have finished this assignment you will have a good command of the functional style.
I will collect two files from your hw3 directory:
In contrast to the last two assignments, this assignment is much larger and will take much more time, spread over many days. It is not an assignment that you can just jump into and do, and it is not something you can leave for the weekend. There is some serious thinking involved. Please read everything carefully before you do anything else. In fact, read it more than once. It will save you a lot of time, and you will understand this whole area much better.
You may know that Google has a wonderful facility for converting units. For instance, suppose you are cooking and you forget how many teaspoons are in a cup. You can simple type "1 cup in teaspoons" into the Google search window, and the answer will come up. And you can even perform more complicated (or silly, depending on how you look at it) queries. For instance, if you haven't already done this—it's a pretty well-known way to amaze your friends—try typing
furlongs per fortnight in miles per hourinto the Google search box. And you can also type things like
27.5 furlongs per fortnight in miles per hourIn this assignment you are going to write a program that does more or less the same thing.
Before we get going, I should say that there are a number of such programs available on the web. I don't believe that any of them are written in Scheme. And further, I don't believe that looking at them is going to help you. (I know this because when I started to do this, that's exactly what I did, and I finally realized that it was getting me nowhere.) On the other hand, I am going to give you some fairly significant suggestions, which I hope will help you a lot in doing this. (And as usual, the work you hand in must be entirely your own in any case.)
Now there are several aspects to this problem:
(27.5 (furlong 1)(fortnight -1))and the format of the "to" quantity will be
((mi 1)(hr -1))and the actual query will be written as a Scheme function taking these two arguments, like this:
(convert '(27.5 (furlong 1)(fortnight -1)) '((mi 1)(hr -1)))Question: why are the quotes necessary?
(0.01023065476190476 (mi 1)(hr -1))A user-friendly procedure would put this back into everyday English. But we're not going to worry about that. We'll just leave it as is.
One thing you will notice is that it is very simple indeed. All units are defined in terms of certain "elementary" or "base" units. (And an elementary unit, for this purpose, is a unit that is not defined in terms of another unit in the units.dat file.) All length units, for instance are represented in terms of meters. Now it would be actually more convenient in constructing this file to allow it to contain entries in which some units were defined in terms of other derived units, like this:
(yd (3 (ft 1)))But this would complicate our processing, and so we won't do it.
We have not discussed how to read in a file to a Scheme program. We will deal with this later in the term. But in the meantime, here's how you do it: At the end of your file convert.scm put the following code:
------------------------ ;; read-file produces a list whose elements are the expressions in the file. (define (read-file) (let ((expr (read))) (if (eof-object? expr) '() (cons expr (read-file))))) ;; Here we go: read in the database. (define source (with-input-from-file "units.dat" read-file)) ------------------------This will read in the file units.dat and put the contents as a Scheme list into the variable source. Then you can just use that list as a lookup table. (How do you look up things in that table? Think about assoc.)
(m 2)represents "meters squared", or "square meters"—these mean the same thing.
((mi 1)(hr -1))represents "miles per hour". And
((kg 1)(m 1)(sec -2))represents "kilogram meters per second squared".
(1 (kg 1)(m 1)(sec -2))represents "1 kilogram meter per second squared", which is also known as "1 newton", and is the unit of force in the MKS ("meter-kilogram-second") system that I hope you are familiar with from whatever physics course you took.
(convert <quantity> <unit-list>)I've already shown you what the output looks like (i.e., the kind of Scheme expression this expression evaluates to) above.
Now here are some ideas that you may find useful. Of course you can really do this any way you want, and I certainly don't insist that you take any of these ideas exactly as I am writing them. (In the past I have found that students often have very original and interesting ideas about how to solve particular problems, and so I encourage you to experiment with different ways of doing things.)
First of all, let's look at the general idea of what you want to do. Conceptually, it's really pretty simple. You are given a quantity—say it is of the form
(a U)where a is a number and U is the sequence of units in a unit-list. For instance, U might be (mi 1)(hr -2). And suppose you want to convert this original quantity to a quantity whose sequence of units is V; i.e., a quantity whose unit-list is (V).
The first thing you have to check is that U is compatible with V. What this really means is that if you express both U and V in terms of the same elementary units, then U turns out to be a constant multiple of V. So the first thing you need to do is to transform U and V so they are expressed in terms of the same elementary units. You will need a procedure that does this. As already specified above, you may assume that if a base-unit is not found by your lookup procedure, then it is already an elementary base-unit (like m, or sec, for instance).
Applying the procedure, you will then get
U = u U-normalized V = v V-normalizedwhere U-normalized and V-normalized are written in elementary units, and where u and v are numbers.
Now U and V are compatible if and only iff U-normalized is the same as V-normalized. So you will need a procedure to check this. And somewhere along the way, you will need to take account of the fact that the order of base-units doesn't matter. For instance, (m 1)(sec -2) is entirely equivalent to (sec -2)(m 1), or even to (sec -1)(m 2)(sec -1)(m -1).
Assuming then that U and V are compatible, you should be able to see that
U = (u/v) VIn fact, I want to you show this in your notes.txt discussion.
Finally then, we get
a U = (au/v) VSo that's what you have to do.
You will need a number of helper functions to do this. Give them useful names that will help you (and me and the grader and anyone else who needs to read your code—you might want to come back and look at this code a year from now, for example) understand what you are doing. And comment them so it is clear what sorts of things they take as input and what they produce when evaluated. Usually giving a good example of how the function is called and what it returns is the way to go when doing this. Further, comments inside the function body can be very helpful in understanding tricky code. Code is not easy to read. Make it easy for the reader; and remember that you might be the reader.
You will also probably need a large number of temporary variables. Don't be afraid of the let special form. And you may find yourself nesting them, like this:
(let ((x ...) (y ...)) (let ((z <something involving x>)) ...and this nesting might even be rather deep. Don't be afraid of this either. But do give your temporary variables descriptive names like first-unit or converted-ratio (not names like x or y, as I did above). This is important. The grader and I will be looking for this.
Be sure to test your procedure. Make up some miserably hard tests. Remember that a quantity could look like this:
(5 (joule 2)(N -3)(hr 1))Although this makes little sense physically, your procedure should handle it just fine. Testing is hard. Try to be as nasty and malicious as possible in the tests you write. That's what software engineeers have to do. Don't ever assume that "no one would ever input something like ...". Believe me, someone will.
To handle complex quantities like this, you will need to find a way of simplifying them. This is part of the process—described above—of representing quantities in terms of elementary units. Be careful about this. It's possible to get confused here. Write down carefully how you are approaching this problem. Make sure you have put in some meaningful comments for this.
Please only use material we have covered in class up through Tuesday,
September 19. In particular,
This is for two reasons:
Finally, I am going to take your notes.txt file very seriously. First, please make sure you answer the questions I wrote above in your notes.txt file. However, if that is all you write about, I will not be very impressed. In addition to that, I want to know what problems you encountered as you did this assignment. What was easy? What took some thinking? What mistakes did you make, and how did you fix them? Would you do things differently a second time? And if you had more time, how would you extend this code to make it more useful and/or user-friendly? (I'm not looking for vague ideas here. If you have an idea, let me know how you would implement it. Don't write actual code, though.)
If you leave writing your notes.txt file until you have finished your coding, you most likely won't do a very good job. For one thing, you will have forgotten a lot. For another thing, you will probably be jammed for time. A better idea is to keep some sort of "diary" as you write your code. Then you can turn your diary into the essay in notes.txt
However: I don't want your notes.txt to be a bunch of raw unedited notes. I want it to be thoughtful and easy to read. I also don't want to see big long listings of test runs. It's a good idea to indicate how you tested your code. But don't give me all the gory details.
Often I find students who think that they are writing notes.txt for me, and they figure that I already know all this. So they write very little, assuming that I can fill what they haven't written. There are two things wrong with this:
Just as one example of something you might write: It's perfectly OK, and in fact, it's good to write things like this: "At first I thought that XXX. But then I found that it led to the following problem: YYY. So I changed my design so that ZZZ." This is good, and I always like to read things like this, because it shows me how you came to understand the problem. And furthermore, it will be of great help to someone who is learning about this for the first time, since they will probably have the same misunderstandings, and this will help them get through this process more easily. And that's the point of writing something like this up.
In fact, I sometimes put comments like that in my own code, because I know that I will probably have to look at it in a few years, and the comment will remind me of where the tricky difficulty was.