SICP Exercise 2.49 segments-painter

Exercise 2.49.  Use segments->painter to define the following primitive painters:
a.  The painter that draws the outline of the designated frame.
b.  The painter that draws an ``X'' by connecting opposite corners of the frame.
c.  The painter that draws a diamond shape by connecting the midpoints of the sides of the frame.

d.  The wave painter.

 SOLUTION
The code and tests are here.

Note: The implementation of the procedure segments->painter in the textbook is different from the similarly named procedure in the sicp plt package.

The plt package procedure takes a list of segments and draws them. Moreover, this procedure draws segments only inside the unit square where 0 <= x,y <= 1. Any points ouside the unit square are simply ignored (at least, there is no visual output)

The textbook implementation also takes a list of segments but instead of drawing them directly, evaluates to a procedure that takes a frame as its input. This procedure when supplied with a frame, maps all the segments from the originally supplied list to this frame and then draws them. Now, the 'draw-line' procedure in the textbook implementation has no equivalent in the plt package. So in order to use the plt package implementation of segments->painter, I have modified the textbook implementation of segments->painter.

Finally, to prevent a name-clash, I have renamed the textbook procedure by appending a '-local' suffix.






Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

SICP Exercise 2.56 differentiation rule

Image
Exercise 2.56.    Show how to extend the basic differentiator to handle more kinds of expressions. For instance, implement the differentiation rule by adding a new clause to the  deriv  program and defining appropriate procedures  exponentiation? ,  base ,  exponent , and  make-exponentiation . (You may use the symbol  **  to denote exponentiation.) Build in the rules that anything raised to the power 0 is 1 and anything raised to the power 1 is the thing itself. SOLUTION The code and tests are here .
Read more

SICP Exercise 1.28 (Miller-Rabin Test)

Exercise 1.28.    One variant of the Fermat test that cannot be fooled is called the  Miller-Rabin test  (Miller 1976; Rabin 1980). This starts from  an alternate form of Fermat's Little Theorem, which states that if  n  is a prime number and  a  is any positive integer less than  n , then  a  raised to the ( n  - 1)st power is congruent to 1 modulo  n . To test the primality of a number  n  by the Miller-Rabin test, we pick a random number  a < n  and raise  a  to the ( n  - 1)st power modulo  n  using the  expmod  procedure. However, whenever we perform the squaring step in  expmod , we check to see if we have discovered a ``nontrivial square root of 1 modulo  n ,'' that is, a number not equal to 1 or  n  - 1 whose square is equal to 1 modulo  n . It is possible to prove that if such a nontrivial square root of 1 exists, then  n  is not prime. It is also possible to prove that if  n  is an odd number that is not prime, then, for at least half the numbers a < n , co
Read more

SICP Exercise 4.18 a alternative strategy for interpreting internal definitions

Exercise 4.18.   Consider an alternative strategy for scanning out definitions that translates the example in the text to (lambda < vars >   (let ((u '*unassigned*)         (v '*unassigned*))     (let ((a < e1 >)           (b < e2 >))       (set! u a)       (set! v b))     < e3 >)) Here  a  and  b  are meant to represent new variable names, created by the interpreter, that do not appear in the user's program. Consider the  solve  procedure from section  3.5.4 : (define (solve f y0 dt)   (define y (integral (delay dy) y0 dt))   (define dy (stream-map f y))   y) Will this procedure work if internal definitions are scanned out as shown in this exercise? What if they are scanned out as shown in the text? Explain. SOLUTION & DISCUSSION The streams based procedure 'solve' in this exercise exposed several issues in my metacircular evaluator implementation. I discovered that streams are not at all handled properly by my evaluator. Moreover, the &
Read more