?
Solved

Recursion in (MIT) Scheme

Posted on 2011-10-01
8
Medium Priority
?
434 Views
Last Modified: 2012-05-12
I'm floundering on a question I'm trying to solve using Scheme.  Fully understanding the homework policy on EE, I just need a bit of help in the right direction.

Trying to write a definition for the mathematical constant "e", to be solved using (1/0!)+(1/1!)+(1/2!)... up to some number I provide.  I have the attached code, and I can't understand why it doesn't work.
(define (fact n)                        ;;method to solve a factorial
  (if (= n 0)
      1
      (* n (fact (- n 1)))))

(define count 0)                        ;;keeps track of progress
(define total 0)                        ;;keeps running total

(define (e limit)
  (if (< count limit)
      total
      (e (+ total (/ 1 (fact (+ count 1)))))
  )
)

Open in new window

0
Comment
Question by:Geisrud
[X]
Welcome to Experts Exchange

Add your voice to the tech community where 5M+ people just like you are talking about what matters.

  • Help others & share knowledge
  • Earn cash & points
  • Learn & ask questions
  • 3
  • 3
  • 2
8 Comments
 
LVL 37

Expert Comment

by:TommySzalapski
ID: 36897023
Looks like count stays at 0 the whole time. You need to increment it.
0
 
LVL 32

Expert Comment

by:phoffric
ID: 36897265
I assume that scheme has some debugging facility - at least the ability to print intermediate results in your recursion.

To debug, add a debug line showing the variables of interest. Then, before running the program, write down what you expect to see in each iteration, and then compare with the run.

That will help you identify the variable values that are wrong per your design.

If that does not solve your problem, then you can post what you expected on the iteration, and what the program produced for additional guidance.
0
 
LVL 14

Author Comment

by:Geisrud
ID: 36897549
Thanks for your replies.

Tommy, I thought I was incrementing my count with (+ count 1)

phffric, to my knowledge, Scheme doesn't have a debugging utility - at least not MIT scheme, using Emacs to write code.  I'd love to use a debugger if you know more about that...
0
Industry Leaders: We Want Your Opinion!

We value your feedback.

Take our survey and automatically be enter to win anyone of the following:
Yeti Cooler, Amazon eGift Card, and Movie eGift Card!

 
LVL 32

Expert Comment

by:phoffric
ID: 36897687
never used scheme. but a very quick check yields this debugging information. have u seen it - any value?
7.4:
    http://groups.csail.mit.edu/mac/ftpdir/scheme-7.4/doc-html/user_6.html

9.0:
    http://web.mit.edu/scheme_v9.0.1/doc/mit-scheme-user/Edwin-Debugger.html

0
 
LVL 14

Author Comment

by:Geisrud
ID: 36897734
phoffric - that's a bit above my pay grade.  But I'll try to check into that as time permits - might come in handy down the road.
0
 
LVL 14

Author Comment

by:Geisrud
ID: 36897742
I did finally come up with code that works.  Not sure why this works and not any of my MANY previous attempts.
(define (fact n)                        ;;method to solve a factorial
  (if (= n 0)
      1
      (* n (fact (- n 1)))))

(define (term x)                        ;;method to solve a single term
  (/ 1 (fact x)))

(define count -1)                        ;;counter variable

(define total 0)                         ;;variable to hold ongoing total

(define (e limit)
  (if (= count limit)                     ;;when the limit reaches count, it outputs total
      total
      (+ total (term limit) (e (- limit 1)))  ;;adds to the total the current term and recursively calls the next number.  Counts down to -1 (so that we include 0 in our calc)
  )
)

Open in new window

0
 
LVL 32

Expert Comment

by:phoffric
ID: 36898008
Not familiar with Scheme. But, check out this thought..

In your OP, you have this expression:
     (/ 1 (fact (+ count 1)))
where count is initialized to 0. So, isn't the first term in your expansion 1/(1!) as opposed to the expected first term of 1/(0!)  ?
0
 
LVL 37

Accepted Solution

by:
TommySzalapski earned 2000 total points
ID: 36898154
If that were all that was missing, then the result would have been e - 1.
The reason the first code did not work was because count was not being incremented. You did use count + 1, but count was always 0. So count + 1 was always 1.
The reason the new code works is that you actually are using a new limit every time. You send limit-1 in each new instance of the function so if you set limit to 100 for the first one, the next one uses 99 as limit. So it sends 98 to the next one, etc.
So you actually are doing the series in reverse, but that doesn't change anything since a+b = b+a (as we all know) so you can do it in any order.
0

Featured Post

[Webinar] How Hackers Steal Your Credentials

Do You Know How Hackers Steal Your Credentials? Join us and Skyport Systems to learn how hackers steal your credentials and why Active Directory must be secure to stop them.

Question has a verified solution.

If you are experiencing a similar issue, please ask a related question

In this post we will learn how to connect and configure Android Device (Smartphone etc.) with Android Studio. After that we will run a simple Hello World Program.
What do responsible coders do? They don't take detrimental shortcuts. They do take reasonable security precautions, create important automation, implement sufficient logging, fix things they break, and care about users.
Progress
Introduction to Processes
Suggested Courses

762 members asked questions and received personalized solutions in the past 7 days.

Join the community of 500,000 technology professionals and ask your questions.

Join & Ask a Question