Functions & Function Values

PLAI §4

Now that we have a form for local bindings, which forced us to deal with proper substitutions and everything that is related, we can get to functions. The concept of a function is itself very close to substitution, and to our `with` form. For example, when we write:

{with {x 5}
{* x x}}

then the `{* x x}` body is itself parametrized over some value for `x`. If we take this expression and take out the `5`, we’re left with something that has all of the necessary ingredients of a function — a bunch of code that is parameterized over some input identifier:

{with {x}
{* x x}}

We only need to replace `with` and use a proper name that indicates that it’s a function:

{fun {x}
{* x x}}

Now we have a new form in our language, one that should have a function as its meaning. As we have seen in the case of `with` expressions, we also need a new form to use these functions. We will use `call` for this, so that

{call {fun {x} {* x x}}
5}

will be the same as the original `with` expression that we started with — the `fun` expression is like the `with` expression with no value, and applying it on `5` is providing that value back:

{with {x 5}
{* x x}}

Of course, this does not help much — all we get is a way to use local bindings that is more verbose from what we started with. What we’re really missing is a way to name these functions. If we get the right evaluation rules, we can evaluate a `fun` expression to some value — which will allow us to bind it to a variable using `with`. Something like this:

{with {sqr {fun {x} {* x x}}}
{+ {call sqr 5}
{call sqr 6}}}

In this expression, we say that `x` is the formal parameter (or argument), and the `5` and `6` are actual parameters (sometimes abbreviated as formals and actuals). Note that naming functions often helps, but many times there are small functions that are fine to specify without a name — for example, consider a two-stage addition function, where there is no apparent good name for the returned function:

{fun {y}
{+ x y}}}}

Implementing First Class Functions

PLAI §6 (uses some stuff from PLAI §5, which we do later)

This is a simple plan, but it is directly related to how functions are going to be used in our language. We know that `{call {fun {x} E1} E2}` is equivalent to a `with` expression, but the new thing here is that we do allow writing just the `{fun ...}` expression by itself, and therefore we need to have some meaning for it. The meaning, or the value of this expression, should roughly be “an expression that needs a value to be plugged in for `x`”. In other words, our language will have these new kinds of values that contain an expression to be evaluated later on.

There are three basic approaches that classify programming languages in relation to how the deal with functions:

1. First order: functions are not real values. They cannot be used or returned as values by other functions. This means that they cannot be stored in data structures. This is what most “conventional” languages used to have in the past. (You will be implementing such a language in homework 4.)

An example of such a language is the Beginner Student language that is used in HtDP, where the language is intentionally first-order to help students write correct code (at the early stages where using a function as a value is usually an error). It’s hard to find practical modern languages that fall in this category.

2. Higher order: functions can receive and return other functions as values. This is what you get with C and modern Fortran.

3. First class: functions are values with all the rights of other values. In particular, they can be supplied to other functions, returned from functions, stored in data structures, and new functions can be created at run-time. (And most modern languages have first class functions.)

The last category is the most interesting one. Back in the old days, complex expressions were not first-class in that they could not be freely composed. This is still the case in machine-code: as we’ve seen earlier, to compute an expression such as

(-b + sqrt(b^2 - 4*a*c)) / 2a

you have to do something like this:

x = b * b
y = 4 * a
y = y * c
x = x - y
x = sqrt(x)
y = -b
x = y + x
y = 2 * a
s = x / y

In other words, every intermediate value needs to have its own name. But with proper (“high-level”) programming languages (at least most of them…) you can just write the original expression, with no names for these values.

With first-class functions something similar happens — it is possible to have complex expressions that consume and return functions, and they do not need to be named.

What we get with our `fun` expression (if we can make it work) is exactly this: it generates a function, and you can choose to either bind it to a name, or not. The important thing is that the value exists independently of a name.

This has a major effect on the “personality” of a programming language as we will see. In fact, just adding this feature will make our language much more advanced than languages with just higher-order or first-order functions.

Quick Example: the following is working JavaScript code, that uses first class functions.

function foo(x) {
function bar(y) { return x + y; }
return bar;
}
function main() {
var f = foo(1);
var g = foo(10);
return [f(2), g(2)];
}

Note that the above definition of `foo` does not use an anonymous “lambda expression” — in Racket terms, it’s translated to

(define (foo x)
(define (bar y) (+ x y))
bar)

The returned function is not anonymous, but it’s not really named either: the `bar` name is bound only inside the body of `foo`, and outside of it that name no longer exists since it’s not its scope. It gets used in the printed form if the function value is displayed, but this is merely a debugging aid. The anonymous `lambda` version that is common in Racket can be used in JavaScript too:

function foo(x) {
return function(y) { return x + y; }
}

Side-note: GCC includes extensions that allow internal function definitions, but it still does not have first class functions — trying to do the above is broken:

#include <stdio.h>
typedef int(*int2int)(int);
int2int foo(int x) {
int bar(int y) { return x + y; }
return bar;
}
int main() {
int2int f = foo(1);
int2int g = foo(10);
printf(">> %d, %d\n", f(2), g(2));
}

The FLANG Language

Now for the implementation — we call this new language FLANG.

First, the BNF:

<FLANG> ::= <num>
| { + <FLANG> <FLANG> }
| { - <FLANG> <FLANG> }
| { * <FLANG> <FLANG> }
| { / <FLANG> <FLANG> }
| { with { <id> <FLANG> } <FLANG> }
| <id>
| { fun { <id> } <FLANG> }
| { call <FLANG> <FLANG> }

And the matching type definition:

(define-type FLANG
[Num  Number]
[Sub  FLANG FLANG]
[Mul  FLANG FLANG]
[Div  FLANG FLANG]
[Id  Symbol]
[With Symbol FLANG FLANG]
[Fun  Symbol      FLANG] ; No named-expression
[Call FLANG FLANG])

The parser for this grammar is, as usual, straightforward:

(: parse-sexpr : Sexpr -> FLANG)
;; parses s-expressions into FLANGs
(define (parse-sexpr sexpr)
(match sexpr
[(number: n)    (Num n)]
[(symbol: name) (Id name)]
[(cons 'with more)
(match sexpr
[(list 'with (list (symbol: name) named) body)
(With name (parse-sexpr named) (parse-sexpr body))]
[else (error 'parse-sexpr "bad `with' syntax in ~s" sexpr)])]
[(cons 'fun more)
(match sexpr
[(list 'fun (list (symbol: name)) body)
(Fun name (parse-sexpr body))]
[else (error 'parse-sexpr "bad `fun' syntax in ~s" sexpr)])]
[(list '+ lhs rhs) (Add (parse-sexpr lhs) (parse-sexpr rhs))]
[(list '- lhs rhs) (Sub (parse-sexpr lhs) (parse-sexpr rhs))]
[(list '* lhs rhs) (Mul (parse-sexpr lhs) (parse-sexpr rhs))]
[(list '/ lhs rhs) (Div (parse-sexpr lhs) (parse-sexpr rhs))]
[(list 'call fun arg)
(Call (parse-sexpr fun) (parse-sexpr arg))]
[else (error 'parse-sexpr "bad syntax in ~s" sexpr)]))

We also need to patch up the substitution function to deal with these things. The scoping rule for the new function form is, unsurprisingly, similar to the rule of `with`, except that there is no extra expression now, and the scoping rule for `call` is the same as for the arithmetic operators:

N[v/x]                = N

{+ E1 E2}[v/x]        = {+ E1[v/x] E2[v/x]}

{- E1 E2}[v/x]        = {- E1[v/x] E2[v/x]}

{* E1 E2}[v/x]        = {* E1[v/x] E2[v/x]}

{/ E1 E2}[v/x]        = {/ E1[v/x] E2[v/x]}

y[v/x]                = y
x[v/x]                = v

{with {y E1} E2}[v/x] = {with {y E1[v/x]} E2[v/x]}
{with {x E1} E2}[v/x] = {with {x E1[v/x]} E2}

{call E1 E2}[v/x]    = {call E1[v/x] E2[v/x]}

{fun {y} E}[v/x]      = {fun {y} E[v/x]}
{fun {x} E}[v/x]      = {fun {x} E}

And the matching code:

(: subst : FLANG Symbol FLANG -> FLANG)
;; substitutes the second argument with the third argument in the
;; first argument, as per the rules of substitution; the resulting
;; expression contains no free instances of the second argument
(define (subst expr from to)
(cases expr
[(Num n) expr]
[(Add l r) (Add (subst l from to) (subst r from to))]
[(Sub l r) (Sub (subst l from to) (subst r from to))]
[(Mul l r) (Mul (subst l from to) (subst r from to))]
[(Div l r) (Div (subst l from to) (subst r from to))]
[(Id name) (if (eq? name from) to expr)]
[(With bound-id named-expr bound-body)
(With bound-id
(subst named-expr from to)
(if (eq? bound-id from)
bound-body
(subst bound-body from to)))]
[(Call l r) (Call (subst l from to) (subst r from to))]
[(Fun bound-id bound-body)
(if (eq? bound-id from)
expr
(Fun bound-id (subst bound-body from to)))]))

Now, before we start working on an evaluator, we need to decide on what exactly do we use to represent values of this language. Before we had functions, we had only number values and we used Racket numbers to represent them. Now we have two kinds of values — numbers and functions. It seems easy enough to continue using Racket numbers to represent numbers, but what about functions? What should be the result of evaluating

{fun {x} {+ x 1}}

? Well, this is the new toy we have: it should be a function value, which is something that can be used just like numbers, but instead of arithmetic operations, we can `call` these things. What we need is a way to avoid evaluating the body expression of the function — delay it — and instead use some value that will contain this delayed expression in a way that can be used later.

To accommodate this, we will change our implementation strategy a little: we will use our syntax objects for numbers (`(Num n)` instead of just `n`), which will be a little inconvenient when we do the arithmetic operations, but it will simplify life by making it possible to evaluate functions in a similar way: simply return their own syntax object as their values. The syntax object has what we need: the body expression that needs to be evaluated later when the function is called, and it also has the identifier name that should be replaced with the actual input to the function call. This means that evaluating:

now yields

(Num 3)

and a number `(Num 5)` evaluates to `(Num 5)`.

In a similar way, `(Fun 'x (Num 2))` evaluates to `(Fun 'x (Num 2))`.

Why would this work? Well, because `call` will be very similar to `with` — the only difference is that its arguments are ordered a little differently, being retrieved from the function that is applied and the argument.

The formal evaluation rules are therefore treating functions like numbers, and use the syntax object to represent both values:

eval(N)        = N

eval({+ E1 E2}) = eval(E1) + eval(E2)

eval({- E1 E2}) = eval(E1) - eval(E2)

eval({* E1 E2}) = eval(E1) * eval(E2)

eval({/ E1 E2}) = eval(E1) / eval(E2)

eval(id)        = error!

eval({with {x E1} E2}) = eval(E2[eval(E1)/x])

eval(FUN)      = FUN ; assuming FUN is a function expression

eval({call E1 E2})
= eval(Ef[eval(E2)/x])  if eval(E1) = {fun {x} Ef}
= error!                otherwise

Note that the last rule could be written using a translation to a `with` expression:

eval({call E1 E2})
= eval({with {x E2} Ef}) if eval(E1) = {fun {x} Ef}
= error!                otherwise

And alternatively, we could specify `with` using `call` and `fun`:

eval({with {x E1} E2}) = eval({call {fun {x} E2} E1})

There is a small problem in these rules which is intuitively seen by the fact that the evaluation rule for a `call` is expected to be very similar to the one for arithmetic operations. We now have two kinds of values, so we need to check the arithmetic operation’s arguments too:

eval({+ E1 E2}) = N1 + N2
if eval(E1), eval(E2) evaluate to numbers N1, N2
otherwise error!
...

The corresponding code is:

(: eval : FLANG -> FLANG)                      ;*** note return type
;; evaluates FLANG expressions by reducing them to *expressions* but
;; only expressions that stand for values: only `Fun`s and `Num`s
(define (eval expr)
(cases expr
[(Num n) expr]                            ;*** change here
[(Add l r) (arith-op + (eval l) (eval r))]
[(Sub l r) (arith-op - (eval l) (eval r))]
[(Mul l r) (arith-op * (eval l) (eval r))]
[(Div l r) (arith-op / (eval l) (eval r))]
[(With bound-id named-expr bound-body)
(eval (subst bound-body
bound-id
(eval named-expr)))]        ;*** no `(Num ...)'
[(Id name) (error 'eval "free identifier: ~s" name)]
[(Fun bound-id bound-body) expr]          ;*** similar to `Num'
[(Call (Fun bound-id bound-body) arg-expr) ;*** nested pattern
(eval (subst bound-body                  ;*** just like `with'
bound-id
(eval arg-expr)))]
[(Call something arg-expr)
(error 'eval "`call' expects a function, got: ~s" something)]))

Note that the `Call` case is doing the same thing we do in the `With` case. In fact, we could have just generated a `With` expression and evaluate that instead:

...
[(Call (Fun bound-id bound-body) arg-expr)
(eval (With bound-id arg-expr bound-body))]
...

The `arith-op` function is in charge of checking that the input values are numbers (represented as FLANG numbers), translating them to plain numbers, performing the Racket operation, then re-wrapping the result in a `Num`. Note how its type indicates that it is a higher-order function.

(: arith-op : (Number Number -> Number) FLANG FLANG -> FLANG)
;; gets a Racket numeric binary operator, and uses it within a FLANG
;; `Num' wrapper (note the H.O type)
(define (arith-op op expr1 expr2)
(Num (op (Num->number expr1) (Num->number expr2))))

It uses the following function to convert FLANG numbers to Racket numbers. (Note that `else` is almost always a bad idea since it can prevent the compiler from showing you places to edit code — but this case is an exception since we never want to deal with anything other than `Num`s.) The reason that this function is relatively trivial is that we chose the easy way and represented numbers using Racket numbers, but we could have used strings or anything else.

(: Num->number : FLANG -> Number)
;; convert a FLANG number to a Racket one
(define (Num->number e)
(cases e
[(Num n) n]
[else (error 'arith-op "expected a number, got: ~s" e)]))

We can also make things a little easier to use if we make `run` convert the result to a number:

(: run : String -> Number)
;; evaluate a FLANG program contained in a string
(define (run str)
(let ([result (eval (parse str))])
(cases result
[(Num n) n]
[else (error 'run "evaluation returned a non-number: ~s"
result)])))

Adding few simple tests we get:

;; The Flang interpreter

#lang pl

#|
The grammar:
<FLANG> ::= <num>
| { + <FLANG> <FLANG> }
| { - <FLANG> <FLANG> }
| { * <FLANG> <FLANG> }
| { / <FLANG> <FLANG> }
| { with { <id> <FLANG> } <FLANG> }
| <id>
| { fun { <id> } <FLANG> }
| { call <FLANG> <FLANG> }

Evaluation rules:

subst:
N[v/x]                = N
{+ E1 E2}[v/x]        = {+ E1[v/x] E2[v/x]}
{- E1 E2}[v/x]        = {- E1[v/x] E2[v/x]}
{* E1 E2}[v/x]        = {* E1[v/x] E2[v/x]}
{/ E1 E2}[v/x]        = {/ E1[v/x] E2[v/x]}
y[v/x]                = y
x[v/x]                = v
{with {y E1} E2}[v/x] = {with {y E1[v/x]} E2[v/x]} ; if y =/= x
{with {x E1} E2}[v/x] = {with {x E1[v/x]} E2}
{call E1 E2}[v/x]    = {call E1[v/x] E2[v/x]}
{fun {y} E}[v/x]      = {fun {y} E[v/x]}          ; if y =/= x
{fun {x} E}[v/x]      = {fun {x} E}

eval:
eval(N)            = N
eval({+ E1 E2})    = eval(E1) + eval(E2)  \ if both E1 and E2
eval({- E1 E2})    = eval(E1) - eval(E2)  \ evaluate to numbers
eval({* E1 E2})    = eval(E1) * eval(E2)  / otherwise error!
eval({/ E1 E2})    = eval(E1) / eval(E2)  /
eval(id)          = error!
eval({with {x E1} E2}) = eval(E2[eval(E1)/x])
eval(FUN)          = FUN ; assuming FUN is a function expression
eval({call E1 E2}) = eval(Ef[eval(E2)/x])
if eval(E1)={fun {x} Ef}, otherwise error!
|#

(define-type FLANG
[Num  Number]
[Sub  FLANG FLANG]
[Mul  FLANG FLANG]
[Div  FLANG FLANG]
[Id  Symbol]
[With Symbol FLANG FLANG]
[Fun  Symbol FLANG]
[Call FLANG FLANG])

(: parse-sexpr : Sexpr -> FLANG)
;; parses s-expressions into FLANGs
(define (parse-sexpr sexpr)
(match sexpr
[(number: n)    (Num n)]
[(symbol: name) (Id name)]
[(cons 'with more)
(match sexpr
[(list 'with (list (symbol: name) named) body)
(With name (parse-sexpr named) (parse-sexpr body))]
[else (error 'parse-sexpr "bad `with' syntax in ~s" sexpr)])]
[(cons 'fun more)
(match sexpr
[(list 'fun (list (symbol: name)) body)
(Fun name (parse-sexpr body))]
[else (error 'parse-sexpr "bad `fun' syntax in ~s" sexpr)])]
[(list '+ lhs rhs) (Add (parse-sexpr lhs) (parse-sexpr rhs))]
[(list '- lhs rhs) (Sub (parse-sexpr lhs) (parse-sexpr rhs))]
[(list '* lhs rhs) (Mul (parse-sexpr lhs) (parse-sexpr rhs))]
[(list '/ lhs rhs) (Div (parse-sexpr lhs) (parse-sexpr rhs))]
[(list 'call fun arg)
(Call (parse-sexpr fun) (parse-sexpr arg))]
[else (error 'parse-sexpr "bad syntax in ~s" sexpr)]))

(: parse : String -> FLANG)
;; parses a string containing a FLANG expression to a FLANG AST
(define (parse str)
(parse-sexpr (string->sexpr str)))

(: subst : FLANG Symbol FLANG -> FLANG)
;; substitutes the second argument with the third argument in the
;; first argument, as per the rules of substitution; the resulting
;; expression contains no free instances of the second argument
(define (subst expr from to)
(cases expr
[(Num n) expr]
[(Add l r) (Add (subst l from to) (subst r from to))]
[(Sub l r) (Sub (subst l from to) (subst r from to))]
[(Mul l r) (Mul (subst l from to) (subst r from to))]
[(Div l r) (Div (subst l from to) (subst r from to))]
[(Id name) (if (eq? name from) to expr)]
[(With bound-id named-expr bound-body)
(With bound-id
(subst named-expr from to)
(if (eq? bound-id from)
bound-body
(subst bound-body from to)))]
[(Call l r) (Call (subst l from to) (subst r from to))]
[(Fun bound-id bound-body)
(if (eq? bound-id from)
expr
(Fun bound-id (subst bound-body from to)))]))

(: Num->number : FLANG -> Number)
;; convert a FLANG number to a Racket one
(define (Num->number e)
(cases e
[(Num n) n]
[else (error 'arith-op "expected a number, got: ~s" e)]))

(: arith-op : (Number Number -> Number) FLANG FLANG -> FLANG)
;; gets a Racket numeric binary operator, and uses it within a FLANG
;; `Num' wrapper
(define (arith-op op expr1 expr2)
(Num (op (Num->number expr1) (Num->number expr2))))

(: eval : FLANG -> FLANG)
;; evaluates FLANG expressions by reducing them to *expressions*
(define (eval expr)
(cases expr
[(Num n) expr]
[(Add l r) (arith-op + (eval l) (eval r))]
[(Sub l r) (arith-op - (eval l) (eval r))]
[(Mul l r) (arith-op * (eval l) (eval r))]
[(Div l r) (arith-op / (eval l) (eval r))]
[(With bound-id named-expr bound-body)
(eval (subst bound-body
bound-id
(eval named-expr)))]
[(Id name) (error 'eval "free identifier: ~s" name)]
[(Fun bound-id bound-body) expr]
[(Call (Fun bound-id bound-body) arg-expr)
(eval (subst bound-body
bound-id
(eval arg-expr)))]
[(Call something arg-expr)
(error 'eval "`call' expects a function, got: ~s" something)]))

(: run : String -> Number)
;; evaluate a FLANG program contained in a string
(define (run str)
(let ([result (eval (parse str))])
(cases result
[(Num n) n]
[else (error 'run "evaluation returned a non-number: ~s"
result)])))

;; tests
(test (run "{call {fun {x} {+ x 1}} 4}")
=> 5)
(test (run "{with {add3 {fun {x} {+ x 3}}}
=> 4)
(test (run "{with {add3 {fun {x} {+ x 3}}}
{with {add1 {fun {x} {+ x 1}}}
{with {x 3}
=> 7)

There is still a problem with this version. First a question — if `call` is similar to arithmetic operations (and to `with` in what it actually does), then how come the code is different enough that it doesn’t even need an auxiliary function?

Second question: what should happen if we evaluate these code snippets:

{fun {y}
{+ x y}}}}
(run "{with {identity {fun {x} x}}
{with {foo {fun {x} {+ x 1}}}
{call {call identity foo} 123}}}")
(run "{call {call {fun {x} {call x 1}}
{fun {x} {fun {y} {+ x y}}}}
123}")

Third question, what will happen if we do the above?

What we’re missing is an evaluation of the function expression, in case it’s not a literal `fun` form. The following fixes this:

(: eval : FLANG -> FLANG)
;; evaluates FLANG expressions by reducing them to *expressions*
(define (eval expr)
(cases expr
[(Num n) expr]
[(Add l r) (arith-op + (eval l) (eval r))]
[(Sub l r) (arith-op - (eval l) (eval r))]
[(Mul l r) (arith-op * (eval l) (eval r))]
[(Div l r) (arith-op / (eval l) (eval r))]
[(With bound-id named-expr bound-body)
(eval (subst bound-body
bound-id
(eval named-expr)))]
[(Id name) (error 'eval "free identifier: ~s" name)]
[(Fun bound-id bound-body) expr]
[(Call fun-expr arg-expr)
(let ([fval (eval fun-expr)])      ;*** need to evaluate this!
(cases fval
[(Fun bound-id bound-body)
(eval (subst bound-body
bound-id
(eval arg-expr)))]
[else (error 'eval "`call' expects a function, got: ~s"
fval)]))]))

The complete code is:

;; The Flang interpreter

#lang pl

#|
The grammar:
<FLANG> ::= <num>
| { + <FLANG> <FLANG> }
| { - <FLANG> <FLANG> }
| { * <FLANG> <FLANG> }
| { / <FLANG> <FLANG> }
| { with { <id> <FLANG> } <FLANG> }
| <id>
| { fun { <id> } <FLANG> }
| { call <FLANG> <FLANG> }

Evaluation rules:

subst:
N[v/x]                = N
{+ E1 E2}[v/x]        = {+ E1[v/x] E2[v/x]}
{- E1 E2}[v/x]        = {- E1[v/x] E2[v/x]}
{* E1 E2}[v/x]        = {* E1[v/x] E2[v/x]}
{/ E1 E2}[v/x]        = {/ E1[v/x] E2[v/x]}
y[v/x]                = y
x[v/x]                = v
{with {y E1} E2}[v/x] = {with {y E1[v/x]} E2[v/x]} ; if y =/= x
{with {x E1} E2}[v/x] = {with {x E1[v/x]} E2}
{call E1 E2}[v/x]    = {call E1[v/x] E2[v/x]}
{fun {y} E}[v/x]      = {fun {y} E[v/x]}          ; if y =/= x
{fun {x} E}[v/x]      = {fun {x} E}

eval:
eval(N)            = N
eval({+ E1 E2})    = eval(E1) + eval(E2)  \ if both E1 and E2
eval({- E1 E2})    = eval(E1) - eval(E2)  \ evaluate to numbers
eval({* E1 E2})    = eval(E1) * eval(E2)  / otherwise error!
eval({/ E1 E2})    = eval(E1) / eval(E2)  /
eval(id)          = error!
eval({with {x E1} E2}) = eval(E2[eval(E1)/x])
eval(FUN)          = FUN ; assuming FUN is a function expression
eval({call E1 E2}) = eval(Ef[eval(E2)/x])
if eval(E1)={fun {x} Ef}, otherwise error!
|#

(define-type FLANG
[Num  Number]
[Sub  FLANG FLANG]
[Mul  FLANG FLANG]
[Div  FLANG FLANG]
[Id  Symbol]
[With Symbol FLANG FLANG]
[Fun  Symbol FLANG]
[Call FLANG FLANG])

(: parse-sexpr : Sexpr -> FLANG)
;; parses s-expressions into FLANGs
(define (parse-sexpr sexpr)
(match sexpr
[(number: n)    (Num n)]
[(symbol: name) (Id name)]
[(cons 'with more)
(match sexpr
[(list 'with (list (symbol: name) named) body)
(With name (parse-sexpr named) (parse-sexpr body))]
[else (error 'parse-sexpr "bad `with' syntax in ~s" sexpr)])]
[(cons 'fun more)
(match sexpr
[(list 'fun (list (symbol: name)) body)
(Fun name (parse-sexpr body))]
[else (error 'parse-sexpr "bad `fun' syntax in ~s" sexpr)])]
[(list '+ lhs rhs) (Add  (parse-sexpr lhs) (parse-sexpr rhs))]
[(list '- lhs rhs) (Sub  (parse-sexpr lhs) (parse-sexpr rhs))]
[(list '* lhs rhs) (Mul  (parse-sexpr lhs) (parse-sexpr rhs))]
[(list '/ lhs rhs) (Div  (parse-sexpr lhs) (parse-sexpr rhs))]
[(list 'call fun arg)
(Call (parse-sexpr fun) (parse-sexpr arg))]
[else (error 'parse-sexpr "bad syntax in ~s" sexpr)]))

(: parse : String -> FLANG)
;; parses a string containing a FLANG expression to a FLANG AST
(define (parse str)
(parse-sexpr (string->sexpr str)))

(: subst : FLANG Symbol FLANG -> FLANG)
;; substitutes the second argument with the third argument in the
;; first argument, as per the rules of substitution; the resulting
;; expression contains no free instances of the second argument
(define (subst expr from to)
(cases expr
[(Num n) expr]
[(Add l r) (Add (subst l from to) (subst r from to))]
[(Sub l r) (Sub (subst l from to) (subst r from to))]
[(Mul l r) (Mul (subst l from to) (subst r from to))]
[(Div l r) (Div (subst l from to) (subst r from to))]
[(Id name) (if (eq? name from) to expr)]
[(With bound-id named-expr bound-body)
(With bound-id
(subst named-expr from to)
(if (eq? bound-id from)
bound-body
(subst bound-body from to)))]
[(Call l r) (Call (subst l from to) (subst r from to))]
[(Fun bound-id bound-body)
(if (eq? bound-id from)
expr
(Fun bound-id (subst bound-body from to)))]))

(: Num->number : FLANG -> Number)
;; convert a FLANG number to a Racket one
(define (Num->number e)
(cases e
[(Num n) n]
[else (error 'arith-op "expected a number, got: ~s" e)]))

(: arith-op : (Number Number -> Number) FLANG FLANG -> FLANG)
;; gets a Racket numeric binary operator, and uses it within a FLANG
;; `Num' wrapper
(define (arith-op op expr1 expr2)
(Num (op (Num->number expr1) (Num->number expr2))))

(: eval : FLANG -> FLANG)
;; evaluates FLANG expressions by reducing them to *expressions*
(define (eval expr)
(cases expr
[(Num n) expr]
[(Add l r) (arith-op + (eval l) (eval r))]
[(Sub l r) (arith-op - (eval l) (eval r))]
[(Mul l r) (arith-op * (eval l) (eval r))]
[(Div l r) (arith-op / (eval l) (eval r))]
[(With bound-id named-expr bound-body)
(eval (subst bound-body
bound-id
(eval named-expr)))]
[(Id name) (error 'eval "free identifier: ~s" name)]
[(Fun bound-id bound-body) expr]
[(Call fun-expr arg-expr)
(let ([fval (eval fun-expr)])
(cases fval
[(Fun bound-id bound-body)
(eval (subst bound-body
bound-id
(eval arg-expr)))]
[else (error 'eval "`call' expects a function, got: ~s"
fval)]))]))

(: run : String -> Number)
;; evaluate a FLANG program contained in a string
(define (run str)
(let ([result (eval (parse str))])
(cases result
[(Num n) n]
[else (error 'run "evaluation returned a non-number: ~s"
result)])))

;; tests
(test (run "{call {fun {x} {+ x 1}} 4}")
=> 5)
(test (run "{with {add3 {fun {x} {+ x 3}}}
=> 4)
(test (run "{with {add3 {fun {x} {+ x 3}}}
{with {add1 {fun {x} {+ x 1}}}
{with {x 3}
=> 7)
(test (run "{with {add {fun {x}
{fun {y}
{+ x y}}}}
=> 17)
(test (run "{with {identity {fun {x} x}}
{with {foo {fun {x} {+ x 1}}}
{call {call identity foo} 123}}}")
=> 124)
(test (run "{call {call {fun {x} {call x 1}}
{fun {x} {fun {y} {+ x y}}}}
123}")
=> 124)

Introducing Racket’s `lambda`

`fun` & `lambda` difference between lambda and simple values not being able to do recursive functions with `let` let* as a derived form let with lambda in Racket –> can be a derived form how `if` can be used to implement `and` and `or` as derived forms

Newtonian syntax vs. a lambda expression.

Don’t be fooled into making a bogus connection between Racket’s syntax, and its `unique` powers… The fact is that it is not the only language that has this capability. For example, this:

(define (f g) (g 2 3))
(f +) ==> 5
(f *) ==> 6
(f (lambda (x y) (+ (square x) (square y)))) ==> 13

Can be written in JavaScript like this:

function f(g) { return g(2,3); }
function square(x) { return x*x; }
console.log(f(function (x,y) { return square(x) + square(y); }));

or in ES6 JavaScript:

let f = (g) => g(2,3);
let square = (x) => x*x;
console.log(f((x,y) => square(x) + square(y)));

In Perl:

sub f { my (\$g) = @_; return \$g->(2,3); }
sub square { my (\$x) = @_; return \$x * \$x; }
print f(sub { my (\$x, \$y) = @_; return square(\$x) + square(\$y); });

In Ruby:

def f(g) g.call(2,3) end
def square(x) x*x end
puts f(lambda{|x,y| square(x) + square(y)})

etc. Even Java has lambda expressions, and recently C++ added them too.

Using Functions as Objects

A very important aspect of Racket — using “higher order” functions — functions that get and return functions. Here is a very simple example:

(define (f x) (lambda () x))
(define a (f 2))
(a)  -->  2
(define b (f 3))
(b)  -->  3

Note: what we get is actually an object that remembers (by the substitution we’re doing) a number. How about:

(define aa (f a))
(aa)    -->  #<procedure> (this is a)
((aa))  -->  2

Take this idea to the next level:

(define (kons x y)
(lambda (b)
(if b x y)))
(define (kar p) (p #t))
(define (kdr p) (p #f))
(define a (kons 1 2))
(define b (kons 3 4))
(list (kar a) (kdr a))
(list (kar b) (kdr b))

Or, with types:

(: kons : (All (A B) A B -> (Boolean -> (U A B))))
(define (kons x y)
(lambda (b)
(if b x y)))
(: kar : (All (T) (Boolean -> T) -> T))
(define (kar p) (p #t))
(: kdr : (All (T) (Boolean -> T) -> T))
(define (kdr p) (p #f))
(define a (kons 1 2))
(define b (kons 3 4))
(list (kar a) (kdr a))
(list (kar b) (kdr b))

Even more — why should the internal function expect a boolean and choose what to return? We can simply expect a function that will take the two values and return one:

(define (kons x y) (lambda (s) (s x y)))
(define (kar p) (p (lambda (x y) x)))
(define (kdr p) (p (lambda (x y) y)))
(define a (kons 1 2))
(define b (kons 3 4))
(list (kar a) (kdr a))
(list (kar b) (kdr b))

And a typed version, using our own constructor to make it a little less painful:

(define-type (Kons A B) = ((A B -> (U A B)) -> (U A B)))

(: kons : (All (A B) A B -> (Kons A B)))
(define (kons x y) (lambda (s) (s x y)))
(: kar : (All (A B) (Kons A B) -> (U A B)))
(define (kar p) (p (lambda (x y) x)))
(: kdr : (All (A B) (Kons A B) -> (U A B)))
(define (kdr p) (p (lambda (x y) y)))
(define a (kons 1 2))
(define b (kons 3 4))
(list (kar a) (kdr a))
(list (kar b) (kdr b))

Note that the `Kons` type definition is the same as:

(define-type Kons = (All (A B) (A B -> (U A B)) -> (U A B)))

so `All` is to polymorphic type definitions what `lambda` is for function definitions.

Finally in JavaScript:

function kons(x,y) { return function(s) { return s(x, y); } }
function kar(p) { return p(function(x,y){ return x; }); }
function kdr(p) { return p(function(x,y){ return y; }); }
a = kons(1,2);
b = kons(3,4);
console.log('a = <' + kar(a) + ',' + kdr(a) + '>' );
console.log('b = <' + kar(b) + ',' + kdr(b) + '>' );

Or with ES6 arrow functions, the function definitionss become:

var kons = (x,y) => s => s(x,y);
var kar  = p => p((x,y) => x);
var kdr  = p => p((x,y) => y);

Currying

A curried function is a function that, instead of accepting two (or more) arguments, accepts only one and returns a function that accepts the rest. For example:

(: plus : Number -> (Number -> Number))
(define (plus x)
(lambda (y)
(+ x y)))

It’s easy to write functions for translating between normal and curried versions.

(define (currify f)
(lambda (x)
(lambda (y)
(f x y))))

Typed version of that, with examples:

(: currify : (All (A B C) (A B -> C) -> (A -> (B -> C))))
;; convert a double-argument function to a curried one
(define (currify f)
(lambda (x) (lambda (y) (f x y))))

(: add : Number Number -> Number)
(define (add x y) (+ x y))

(: plus : Number -> (Number -> Number))

(test ((plus 1) 2) => 3)
(test (((currify add) 1) 2) => 3)
(test (map (plus 1) '(1 2 3)) => '(2 3 4))
(test (map ((currify add) 1) '(1 2 3)) => '(2 3 4))
(test (map ((currify +) 1) '(1 2 3)) => '(2 3 4))

Usages — common with H.O. functions like map, where we want to fix one argument.

When dealing with such higher-order code, the types are very helpful, since every arrow corresponds to a function:

(: currify : (All (A B C) (A B -> C) -> (A -> (B -> C))))

It is common to make the `->` function type associate to the right, so you can find this type written as:

currify : (A B -> C) -> (A -> B -> C)

or even as

currify : (A B -> C) -> A -> B -> C

but that can be a little confusing…

Using Higher-Order & Anonymous Functions

Say that we have a function for estimating derivatives of a function at a specific point:

(define dx 0.01)

(: deriv : (Number -> Number) Number -> Number)
;; compute the derivative of `f' at the given point `x'
(define (deriv f x)
(/ (- (f (+ x dx)) (f x)) dx))

(: integrate : (Number -> Number) Number -> Number)
;; compute an integral of `f' at the given point `x'
(define (integrate f x)
(: loop : Number Number -> Number)
(define (loop y acc)
(if (> y x)
(* acc dx)
(loop (+ y dx) (+ acc (f y)))))
(loop 0 0))

And say that we want to try out various functions given some `plot` function that draws graphs of numeric functions, for example:

(plot sin)

The problem is that `plot` expects a single `(Number -> Number)` function — if we want to try it with a derivative, we can do this:

(: sin-deriv : Number -> Number)
;; the derivative of sin
(define sin-deriv (lambda (x) (deriv sin x)))
(plot sin-deriv)

But this will get very tedious very fast — it is much simpler to use an anonymous function:

(plot (lambda (x) (deriv sin x)))

we can even verify that our derivative is correct by comparing a known function to its derivative

(plot (lambda (x) (- (deriv sin x) (cos x))))

But it’s still not completely natural to do these things — you need to explicitly combine functions, which is not too convenient. Instead of doing this, we can write H.O. functions that will work with functional inputs and outputs. For example, we can write a function to subtract functions:

(: fsub : (Number -> Number) (Number -> Number)
-> (Number -> Number))
;; subtracts two numeric 1-argument functions
(define (fsub f g)
(lambda (x) (- (f x) (g x))))

and the same for the derivative:

(: fderiv : (Number -> Number) -> (Number -> Number))
;; compute the derivative function of `f'
(define (fderiv f)
(lambda (x) (deriv f x)))

Now we can try the same in a much easier way:

(plot (fsub (fderiv sin) cos))

More than that — our `fderiv` could be created from `deriv` automatically:

(: currify : (All (A B C) (A B -> C) -> (A -> B -> C)))
;; convert a double-argument function to a curried one
(define (currify f)
(lambda (x) (lambda (y) (f x y))))

(: fderiv : (Number -> Number) -> (Number -> Number))
;; compute the derivative function of `f'
(define fderiv (currify deriv))

Same principle with `fsub`: we can write a function that converts a binary arithmetical function into a function that operates on unary numeric function. But to make things more readable we can define new types for unary and binary numeric functions:

(define-type UnaryFun  = (Number -> Number))
(define-type BinaryFun = (Number Number -> Number))

(: binop->fbinop : BinaryFun -> (UnaryFun UnaryFun -> UnaryFun))
;; turns an arithmetic binary operator to a function operator
(define (binop->fbinop op)
(lambda (f g)
(lambda (x) (op (f x) (g x)))))

(: fsub : UnaryFun UnaryFun -> UnaryFun)
;; functional pointwise subtraction
(define fsub (binop->fbinop -))

We can do this with anything — developing a rich library of functions and functionals (functions over functions) is extremely easy… Here’s a pretty extensive yet very short library of functions:

#lang pl untyped

(define (currify f)
(lambda (x) (lambda (y) (f x y))))
(define (binop->fbinop op)
(lambda (f g)
(lambda (x) (op (f x) (g x)))))
(define (compose f g)
(lambda (x) (f (g x))))

(define dx 0.01)
(define (deriv f x)
(/ (- (f (+ x dx)) (f x)) dx))
(define (integrate f x)
(define over? (if (< x 0) < >))
(define step  (if (< x 0) - +))
(define add  (if (< x 0) - +))
(define (loop y acc)
(if (over y x)
(/ acc dx)
(loop (step y dx) (add acc (f y)))))
(loop 0 0))

(define fsub (binop->fbinop -))
(define fmul (binop->fbinop *))
(define fdiv (binop->fbinop /))
(define fderiv    (currify deriv))
(define fintegrate (currify integrate))
;; ...

This is written in the “untyped dialect” of the class language, but it should be easy now to add the types.

Examples:

;; want to verify that `integrate' is the opposite of `deriv':
;;  take a function, subtract it from its derivative's integral
(plot (fsub sin (fintegrate (fderiv sin))))

;; want to magnify the errors? -- here's how you magnify:
(plot (compose ((currify *) 5) sin))

;; so:
(plot (compose ((currify *) 20)
(fsub sin (fintegrate (fderiv sin)))))