Programatically filling in a letrec in Scheme. Macros or eval?

Question

I'm just playing with an NFA for string recognition. I have a macro that creates a function which consumes input and passes on the rest to some other functions. Because there might be loops in my NFA graph, I'm using letrec to put the whole thing together. Here is some code (been testing in PLT-Scheme):

(define-syntax-rule (match chars next accepting)
  ; a function that consumes a list of chars from a list l. 
  ; on success (if there's more to do) invokes each of next on the remainder of l.
  (lambda (l) 
    (let loop ((c chars) (s l))
      (cond
        ((empty? c)
         (cond 
           ((and (empty? s) accepting) #t)
           (else 
            (ormap (lambda (x) (x s)) next))))
        ((empty? s) #f)
        ((eq? (car c) (car s)) 
         (loop (cdr c) (cdr s)))
        (else #f)))))

; matches (a|b)*ac. e .g. '(a a b b a c)
(define (matches? l)
  (letrec
      ([s4 (match '( ) '()        #t)]
       [s3 (match '(c) `(,s4)     #f)]
       [s2 (match '(a) `(,s3)     #f)]
       [s1 (match '( ) `(,s2 ,s5) #f)]
       [s5 (match '( ) `(,s6 ,s7) #f)]
       [s6 (match '(a) `(,s8)     #f)]
       [s7 (match '(b) `(,s8)     #f)]
       [s8 (match '( ) `(,s1)     #f)])
    (s1 l)))


(matches? '(a c))
(matches? '(a b b b a c))
(matches? '(z a b b b a c))

Now, what if I had a simple data-structure to represent my NFA, like a list of lists. e.g.

'((s4 () () #t)
  (s3 (c) (s4) #f) 
  ...)

My question is: How would I turn that list into the former letrec statement? I'm not too good with Macros and my understanding is that I probably shouldn't be using eval.

Answer 1

If the list is known at compile time (what I mean is, before your program starts running) then you can use a macro. Otherwise you must use eval.

It's ok. This is one of the good uses for eval. :)

Answer 2

I came up with this macro which seems to do the job (I'm not an expert either):

(define-syntax nfa
  (syntax-rules (let-bindings)
    ; All the let bindings have been expanded
    [(nfa start (let-bindings . bindings))
     (lambda (l) (letrec bindings (start l)))]
    ; Otherwise, expand the next binding
    [(nfa start (let-bindings . bindings) (s c n a) . rest)
     (nfa start (let-bindings (s (match 'c (list . n) a)) . bindings) . rest)]
    ; Insert the expanded bindings list
    [(nfa start states)
     (nfa start (let-bindings) . states)]))

; matches (a|b)*ac. e .g. '(a a b b a c)
(define matches?
  (nfa s1 ([s4 ( ) ()      #t]
           [s3 (c) (s4)    #f]
           [s2 (a) (s3)    #f]
           [s1 ( ) (s2 s5) #f]
           [s5 ( ) (s6 s7) #f]
           [s6 (a) (s8)    #f]
           [s7 (b) (s8)    #f]
           [s8 ( ) (s1)    #f])))

The trick is to use intermediate forms to create "subtitution loops", and reserve identifiers (cf. let-bindings) to distinguish these intermediate forms from direct usage of the macro.

Answer 3

I think your problem can be seprate into 2 subproblem:

1. write a macro that consumes a NFA description and generate a NFA automatically,I call this macro make-NFA
2. apply make-NFA to a list generated programatically,I call this macro apply-macro

the second subproblem is easy:

(define-syntax apply-macro
  (syntax-rules ()
    ((_ macro ls)
     (eval 
      `(macro ,@ls)
      (interaction-environment)))))
;(define ls '(1 2 3))
;(apply-macro if ls)=>2

the first question,I have a DFA sample,you can write a NFA by youself:

(define-syntax make-DFA
  (syntax-rules (: ->)
    ((_ init-state (state : result (symbol -> next) ...) ...)
     (letrec 
         ((state 
           (lambda(sigma)
             (cond
               ((null? sigma) result)
               (else
                (case (car sigma)
                  ((symbol) 
                   (next (cdr sigma)))...
                  (else false))))))... )
       init-state)))) 

(define DFA1
  (make-DFA q1
             (q1 : true (#\a -> q2)
                 (#\b -> q3))
             (q2 : false (#\a -> q1)
                 (#\b -> q4))
             (q3 : false (#\a -> q4)
                 (#\b -> q1))
             (q4 : true (#\a -> q3)
                 (#\b -> q2))))
(DFA1 (string->list "ababa"));=>#f

well,may be define-macro is a better way to implement apply-macro.