Boolean Values and Predicate Procedures
Summary:
Many of Scheme's control structures, such as conditionals (which
you'll learn about in a subsequent reading), need mechanisms for
constructing tests that return the values true
or false. These tests can also be useful for
gathering information about a variety of kinds of values. In this
reading, we consider the types, basic procedures, and mechanisms for
combining results that support such tests.
Introduction
When writing complex programs, we often need to ask questions about the
values with which we are computing. Is this pixel a shade of red? Is
this image at least 100x100? Are these two colors close enough to be
indistinguishable? Is this a light or dark color? Most frequently,
these questions (which we often phrase as tests) are used
in control structures. For example, we might decide to do one thing for
large images and another for small images or we might replace light colors
by white and dark colors by black.
To express these kinds of questions, we need a variety of tools.
First, we need a type in which to express the valid
answers to questions. Second, we need a collection of procedures that
can answer simple questions. Third, we need ways to combine questions.
Finally, we need control structures that use these questions. In the
subsequent sections of this reading, we consider each of these issues.
We return to more complex control structures in a subsequent reading.
Boolean Values
A Boolean value is a datum that reflects the
outcome of a single yes-or-no test. For instance, if one were to
ask Scheme to compute whether pure red has a high blue component,
it would be able to determine that it does not, and it would signal
this result by displaying the Boolean value for no
or false
, which is #f. There is only
one other Boolean value, the one meaning yes
or
true
, which is #t. These are called
Boolean values
in honor of the logician George Boole
who was the first to develop a satisfactory formal theory of them.
(Some folks now talk about fuzzy logic
that includes
values other than true
and false
, but
that's beyond the scope of this course.)
Predicates
A predicate is a procedure that always returns a
Boolean value. A procedure call in which the procedure is a predicate
performs some yes-or-no test on its arguments. For instance, the
predicate number? (the question mark is part of the name
of the procedure) takes one argument and returns #t if
that argument is a number, #f if it does not. Similarly,
the predicate even? takes one argument, which must be
an integer, and returns #t if the integer is even and
#f if it is odd. The names of most Scheme predicates
end with question marks, and Grinnell's computer scientists recommend
this useful convention, even though it is not required by the rules
of the programming language. (If you ever notice that we've failed to
include a question mark in a predicate and you're the first to tell us,
we'll give you some extra credit.)
Scheme provides a wide variety of basic predicates and MediaScheme adds a
few more. We will consider a few right now, but learn more as the
course progresses.
Type Predicates
The simplest predicates let you test the type
of a value.
Scheme provides a number of such predicates.
number? tests
whether its argument is a number.
integer? tests
whether its argument is an integer.
real? tests
whether its argument is a real number.
string? tests whether
its argument is a string.
procedure? tests
whether its argument is a procedure.
boolean? tests
whether its argument is a Boolean value.
MediaScheme adds a few special predicates that are tailored to
working with colors and images. Because these types lack the
specificity of the internal representation of the built-in types,
these predicates give answers that typically represent whether we can
interpret the value as the type, not whether it
was actually built using one of the constructors for that type.
image? tests
whether its argument can be interpreted as an image.
rgb? tests whether its argument can be
interpreted as an RGB color.
color-name? tests whether its argument can be
interpreted as a color name.
color? tests whether its argument can be interpreted
as a color. (That is, it checks whether it's an RGB color, a color-name,
or one of a few other representations of colors that MediaScheme supports.)
drawing? tests whether its argument can be
interpreted as a drawing.
turtle? tests whether its argument seems to be
a turtle.
Equality Predicates
Scheme provides a variety of predicates for testing whether two values
can be understood to be the same.
eq? tests whether
its two arguments are identical, in the very narrow sense of occupying
the same storage location in the computer's memory. In practice, this
is useful information only if at least one argument is known to be a
symbol, a Boolean value, or an integer.
eqv? tests whether its two arguments
should normally be regarded as the same object
(as
the language standard declares). Note, however, that two collections
of values can have the same elements without being regarded as the
same object
. Also note that in Scheme's view the number 5,
which is exact
, is not necessarily the same object
as the number 5.0, which might be an approximation.
equal? tests whether
its two arguments are the same or, in the case of lists, whether they
have the same contents.
= tests whether its arguments,
which must all be numbers, are numerically equal; 5 and 5.0 are
numerically equal for this purpose.
For this class, you are not required to understand
the difference between the eq? and
eqv? procedures. In particular, you need not
plan to use the eqv? procedure. At least for the
first half of the semester, you also need not understand the difference
between the eq? and equal?
procedures. Feel free to use equal? almost
exclusively, except when dealing with numbers, in which case you should
use =.
Numeric Predicates
Scheme also provides many numeric predicates, some of which you may have
already explored.
< tests whether its arguments, which must all be
numbers, are in strictly ascending numerical order. (The
< operation is one of the few built-in predicates
that does not have an accompanying question mark.)
> tests whether its arguments,
which must all be numbers, are in strictly descending numerical order.
<= tests whether its arguments, which must all be
numbers, are in ascending numerical order, allowing equality.
>= tests whether its arguments, which must all be
numbers, are in descending numerical order, allowing equality.
even? tests whether its
argument, which must be an integer, is even.
odd? tests whether its argument,
which must be an integer, is odd.
zero? tests whether its argument, which must
be a number, is equal to zero.
positive? tests whether
its argument, which must be a real number, is positive.
negative? tests whether
its argument, which must be a real number, is negative.
exact? tests whether its argument, which
must be a number, is represented exactly.
inexact? tests whether its argument, which
must be a number, is not represented exactly.
Negating Boolean Values with not
Not all the procedures we use to work with Boolean values are strictly
predicates.
Another useful Boolean procedure is not, which
takes one argument and returns #t if the argument is
#f and #f if the argument is anything else.
For example, one can test whether picture is not an
image with
> (not (image? picture))
If Scheme says that the value of this expression is #t, then
picture is not an image.
And and Or
The and and or keywords have
simple logical meanings. In particular, the and
of a collection of Boolean values is true if all are true and false
if any value is false, the or of a collection of
Boolean values is true if any of the values is true and false if all
the values are false. For example,
> (and #t #t #t)
#t
> (and (< 1 2) (< 2 3))
#t
> (and (odd? 1) (odd? 3) (odd? 5) (odd? 6))
#f
> (and)
#t
> (or (odd? 1) (odd? 3) (odd? 5) (odd? 6))
#t
> (or (even? 1) (even? 3) (even? 4) (even? 5))
#t
> (or)
#f
Detour: Keywords vs. Procedures
You may note that we were careful to describe and
and or as keywords
rather than
as procedures
. The distinction is an important one.
Although keywords look remarkably like procedures, Scheme distinguishes
keywords from procedures by the order of evaluation of the parameters.
For procedures, all the parameters are evaluated and then the procedure
is applied. For keywords, not all parameters need be evaluated,
and custom orders of evaluation are possible.
If and and or were procedures, we could not
guarantee their control behavior. We'd also get some ugly errors. For
example, consider the extended version of the even?
predicate below:
Suppose new-even? is called with 2.3 as a
parameter. In the keyword implementation of and,
the first test, (integer? 2.3),
fails, and new-even? returns false. If
and were a procedure, we would still evaluate
the (even? val), and that test would
generate an error, since even? can only be called
on integers.
Another Detour: Separating the World into Not False and False
Although many computer scientists, philosophers, and mathematicians prefer
the purity of dividing the world into true
and
false
, Scheme supports a somewhat more general
separation. In Scheme, anything that is not false is considered
truish
. Hence, you can use expressions that return
values other than truth values wherever a truth value is expected.
For example,
> (and #t 1)
1
> (or 3 #t #t)
3
> (not 1)
#f
> (not (not 1))
#t
Checking Whether a Name is Defined
MediaScheme provides one additional keyword predicate,
(defined? name).
This procedure takes one parameter, a name (as we would use in
define), and determines whether it has been
defined by a top-level define.
> (defined? x)
#f
> (define x 2)
> (defined? x)
#t
> (let ((y 2)) (defined? y))
#f
> (defined? y)
#f
> (defined? rgb-new)
#t
Like and and or, although
defined? looks like a procedure, it is instead
a keyword. Why? Because defined? treats its
parameter differently (not evaluating it, as most procedures do,
but taking it directly as a name), it can't be implemented as a pure
procedure. Hence, if you try to use defined?
as a value (e.g., as a parameter to another procedure), you will get
an error.
> integer?
#<procedure:integer?>
> defined?
Interactions:1:0: defined?: bad syntax in: defined?
Writing Our Own Color Predicates
Can we write predicates that work with colors? Certainly. One simple
question is whether we might consider two colors near to each other.
What are criteria for making that decision? One possibility is that we
will consider two colors similar if all of their components are within
8 of each other. We can define that predicate as follows:
Here's a pair of useful predicates: One computes whether a color might
reasonably be considered light; another computes whether a color
might reasonably consider dark.
And and Or as Control Structures
We've seen how and and or
can be used to combine tests. But and and
or can be used for so much more. In fact, they
can be used as control structures.
In an and-expression, the expressions that follow
the keyword and are evaluated in succession until
one is found to have the value #f (in which case the rest
of the expressions are skipped and the #f becomes the
value of the entire and-expression). If, after
evaluating all of the expressions, none is found to be #f
then the value of the last expression becomes the value of the entire
and expression. This evaluation strategy gives
the programmer a way to combine several tests into one that will
succeed only if all of its parts succeed.
This strategy also gives the programmer a way to avoid
meaningless tests. For example, we should not make the comparison
(< a b) unless we are sure that
both a and b are numbers.
In an or expression, the expressions that follow
the keyword or are evaluated in succession until
one is found to have a value other than#f, in which case
the rest of the expressions are skipped and this value becomes the
value of the entire or-expression. If all of the
expressions have been evaluated and all have the value #f,
then the value of the or-expression is
#f. This gives the programmer a way to combine several
tests into one that will succeed if any of its
parts succeeds.
In these cases, and returns the last parameter it encounters
(or false, if it encounters a false value) while or returns
the first non-false value it encounters. For example,
> (and 1 2 3)
3
> (define x 'two)
> (define y 3)
> (+ x y)
+: expects type <number> as 1st argument, given: two; other arguments were: 3
> (and (number? x) (number? y) (+ x y))
#f
> (define x 2)
> (and (number? x) (number? y) (+ x y))
5
> (or 1 2 3)
1
> (or 1 #f 3)
1
> (or #f 2 3)
2
> (or #f #f 3)
3
We can use the ideas above to make an addition procedure that returns
#f if either parameter is not a number. We might say that
such a procedure is a bit safer than the normal addition procedure.
Let's compare this version to the standard addition procedure, +.
> (+ 2 3)
5
> (safe-add 2 3)
5
> (+ 2 'three)
Error: +: argument 2 must be: number
> (safe-add 2 'three)
#f
If we'd prefer to return 0, rather than #f, we could add an
or clause.
In most cases, safer-add acts much like
safe-add. However, when we use the result of the
two procedures as an argument to another procedure, we get a little
bit further through the calculation.
> (* 4 (+ 2 3))
20
> (* 4 (safer-add 2 3))
20
> (* 4 (+ 2 'three))
Error: +: argument 2 must be: number
> (* 4 (safe-add 2 'three))
Error: *: argument 2 must be: number
> (* 4 (safer-add 2 'three))
0
Different situations will call for different choices between those
strategies.
An Application: Black, Grey, and White
Here's a simple application of the preceding strategies: We can write a
procedure that, given a color, returns black if the color is dark, white
if the color is light, and grey if the color is neither dark nor light.
How? Well, we can use and to compute either black,
if the color is dark, or #f, if the color is not dark.
(and (rgb-dark? color) black)
Similarly, we can use and to compute either white,
if the color is light, or #f if the color is not light.
(and (rgb-light? color) white)
Finally, we can use or to put it all together.
Another Application: Conditional Defines
Here's a slightly stranger, but potentially useful, example. As you've
noted, we often want to associate the name canvas with
an image on which we experiment. Unfortunately, if you put something
like the following in your definitions pane, each time you click
Run, you get a new image.
(define canvas (image-show (image-new 200 200)))
Is there something we can do to ensure that we don't create a new
image each time we click run? We can generate the image by hand once,
observe its number, and then use define to associate the
name canvas with that number.
(define canvas 2) ; The number of the image we created by hand
However, if we subsequently
close the image, canvas no longer refers to an actual
image.
Using the Boolean operations, we can write an expression that will
check whether we've created an image (but not too many images) and,
if so, associate canvas with that image. If there is
no available image, the expression will build and show a new image and
then associate canvas with that new image.
(define canvas
(or (and (image? 1) 1)
(and (image? 2) 2)
(and (image? 3) 3)
(and (image? 4) 4)
(image-show (image-new 200 200))))
Although it may feel like the define needs to be
within the or, the nature of these various keywords
makes the particular order necessary.
Clearly, this will only work the first four times we create an image.
It seems tempting to use one of our looping structures. However, we
do not yet know a looping structure that will handle this type of
situation.