Instruction
stringlengths
45
106
input_code
stringlengths
1
13.7k
output_code
stringlengths
1
13.7k
Convert the following code from J to Java, ensuring the logic remains intact.
constF=:3 :0 {.''`(y "_) )
import java.util.function.Supplier; import java.util.ArrayList; public class ValueCapture { public static void main(String[] args) { ArrayList<Supplier<Integer>> funcs = new ArrayList<>(); for (int i = 0; i < 10; i++) { int j = i; funcs.add(() -> j * j); } Supplier<Integer> foo = funcs.get(3); System.out.println(foo.get()); } }
Produce a functionally identical Java code for the snippet given in J.
constF=:3 :0 {.''`(y "_) )
import java.util.function.Supplier; import java.util.ArrayList; public class ValueCapture { public static void main(String[] args) { ArrayList<Supplier<Integer>> funcs = new ArrayList<>(); for (int i = 0; i < 10; i++) { int j = i; funcs.add(() -> j * j); } Supplier<Integer> foo = funcs.get(3); System.out.println(foo.get()); } }
Ensure the translated Python code behaves exactly like the original J snippet.
constF=:3 :0 {.''`(y "_) )
funcs = [] for i in range(10): funcs.append(lambda: i * i) print funcs[3]()
Keep all operations the same but rewrite the snippet in Python.
constF=:3 :0 {.''`(y "_) )
funcs = [] for i in range(10): funcs.append(lambda: i * i) print funcs[3]()
Change the following J code into Go without altering its purpose.
constF=:3 :0 {.''`(y "_) )
package main import "fmt" func main() { fs := make([]func() int, 10) for i := range fs { i := i fs[i] = func() int { return i * i } } fmt.Println("func #0:", fs[0]()) fmt.Println("func #3:", fs[3]()) }
Change the programming language of this snippet from J to Go without modifying what it does.
constF=:3 :0 {.''`(y "_) )
package main import "fmt" func main() { fs := make([]func() int, 10) for i := range fs { i := i fs[i] = func() int { return i * i } } fmt.Println("func #0:", fs[0]()) fmt.Println("func #3:", fs[3]()) }
Can you help me rewrite this code in C instead of Julia, keeping it the same logically?
funcs = [ () -> i^2 for i = 1:10 ]
#include <stdio.h> #include <string.h> #include <stdlib.h> #include <sys/mman.h> typedef int (*f_int)(); #define TAG 0xdeadbeef int _tmpl() { volatile int x = TAG; return x * x; } #define PROT (PROT_EXEC | PROT_WRITE) #define FLAGS (MAP_PRIVATE | MAP_ANONYMOUS) f_int dupf(int v) { size_t len = (void*)dupf - (void*)_tmpl; f_int ret = mmap(NULL, len, PROT, FLAGS, 0, 0); char *p; if(ret == MAP_FAILED) { perror("mmap"); exit(-1); } memcpy(ret, _tmpl, len); for (p = (char*)ret; p < (char*)ret + len - sizeof(int); p++) if (*(int *)p == TAG) *(int *)p = v; return ret; } int main() { f_int funcs[10]; int i; for (i = 0; i < 10; i++) funcs[i] = dupf(i); for (i = 0; i < 9; i++) printf("func[%d]: %d\n", i, funcs[i]()); return 0; }
Ensure the translated C code behaves exactly like the original Julia snippet.
funcs = [ () -> i^2 for i = 1:10 ]
#include <stdio.h> #include <string.h> #include <stdlib.h> #include <sys/mman.h> typedef int (*f_int)(); #define TAG 0xdeadbeef int _tmpl() { volatile int x = TAG; return x * x; } #define PROT (PROT_EXEC | PROT_WRITE) #define FLAGS (MAP_PRIVATE | MAP_ANONYMOUS) f_int dupf(int v) { size_t len = (void*)dupf - (void*)_tmpl; f_int ret = mmap(NULL, len, PROT, FLAGS, 0, 0); char *p; if(ret == MAP_FAILED) { perror("mmap"); exit(-1); } memcpy(ret, _tmpl, len); for (p = (char*)ret; p < (char*)ret + len - sizeof(int); p++) if (*(int *)p == TAG) *(int *)p = v; return ret; } int main() { f_int funcs[10]; int i; for (i = 0; i < 10; i++) funcs[i] = dupf(i); for (i = 0; i < 9; i++) printf("func[%d]: %d\n", i, funcs[i]()); return 0; }
Convert this Julia block to C#, preserving its control flow and logic.
funcs = [ () -> i^2 for i = 1:10 ]
using System; using System.Linq; class Program { static void Main() { var captor = (Func<int, Func<int>>)(number => () => number * number); var functions = Enumerable.Range(0, 10).Select(captor); foreach (var function in functions.Take(9)) { Console.WriteLine(function()); } } }
Port the following code from Julia to C# with equivalent syntax and logic.
funcs = [ () -> i^2 for i = 1:10 ]
using System; using System.Linq; class Program { static void Main() { var captor = (Func<int, Func<int>>)(number => () => number * number); var functions = Enumerable.Range(0, 10).Select(captor); foreach (var function in functions.Take(9)) { Console.WriteLine(function()); } } }
Change the following Julia code into C++ without altering its purpose.
funcs = [ () -> i^2 for i = 1:10 ]
#include <iostream> #include <functional> #include <vector> int main() { std::vector<std::function<int()> > funcs; for (int i = 0; i < 10; i++) funcs.push_back([=]() { return i * i; }); for ( std::function<int( )> f : funcs ) std::cout << f( ) << std::endl ; return 0; }
Convert this Julia block to C++, preserving its control flow and logic.
funcs = [ () -> i^2 for i = 1:10 ]
#include <iostream> #include <functional> #include <vector> int main() { std::vector<std::function<int()> > funcs; for (int i = 0; i < 10; i++) funcs.push_back([=]() { return i * i; }); for ( std::function<int( )> f : funcs ) std::cout << f( ) << std::endl ; return 0; }
Can you help me rewrite this code in Java instead of Julia, keeping it the same logically?
funcs = [ () -> i^2 for i = 1:10 ]
import java.util.function.Supplier; import java.util.ArrayList; public class ValueCapture { public static void main(String[] args) { ArrayList<Supplier<Integer>> funcs = new ArrayList<>(); for (int i = 0; i < 10; i++) { int j = i; funcs.add(() -> j * j); } Supplier<Integer> foo = funcs.get(3); System.out.println(foo.get()); } }
Transform the following Julia implementation into Java, maintaining the same output and logic.
funcs = [ () -> i^2 for i = 1:10 ]
import java.util.function.Supplier; import java.util.ArrayList; public class ValueCapture { public static void main(String[] args) { ArrayList<Supplier<Integer>> funcs = new ArrayList<>(); for (int i = 0; i < 10; i++) { int j = i; funcs.add(() -> j * j); } Supplier<Integer> foo = funcs.get(3); System.out.println(foo.get()); } }
Port the provided Julia code into Python while preserving the original functionality.
funcs = [ () -> i^2 for i = 1:10 ]
funcs = [] for i in range(10): funcs.append(lambda: i * i) print funcs[3]()
Produce a language-to-language conversion: from Julia to Go, same semantics.
funcs = [ () -> i^2 for i = 1:10 ]
package main import "fmt" func main() { fs := make([]func() int, 10) for i := range fs { i := i fs[i] = func() int { return i * i } } fmt.Println("func #0:", fs[0]()) fmt.Println("func #3:", fs[3]()) }
Ensure the translated Go code behaves exactly like the original Julia snippet.
funcs = [ () -> i^2 for i = 1:10 ]
package main import "fmt" func main() { fs := make([]func() int, 10) for i := range fs { i := i fs[i] = func() int { return i * i } } fmt.Println("func #0:", fs[0]()) fmt.Println("func #3:", fs[3]()) }
Translate the given Lua code snippet into C without altering its behavior.
funcs={} for i=1,10 do table.insert(funcs, function() return i*i end) end funcs[2]() funcs[3]()
#include <stdio.h> #include <string.h> #include <stdlib.h> #include <sys/mman.h> typedef int (*f_int)(); #define TAG 0xdeadbeef int _tmpl() { volatile int x = TAG; return x * x; } #define PROT (PROT_EXEC | PROT_WRITE) #define FLAGS (MAP_PRIVATE | MAP_ANONYMOUS) f_int dupf(int v) { size_t len = (void*)dupf - (void*)_tmpl; f_int ret = mmap(NULL, len, PROT, FLAGS, 0, 0); char *p; if(ret == MAP_FAILED) { perror("mmap"); exit(-1); } memcpy(ret, _tmpl, len); for (p = (char*)ret; p < (char*)ret + len - sizeof(int); p++) if (*(int *)p == TAG) *(int *)p = v; return ret; } int main() { f_int funcs[10]; int i; for (i = 0; i < 10; i++) funcs[i] = dupf(i); for (i = 0; i < 9; i++) printf("func[%d]: %d\n", i, funcs[i]()); return 0; }
Write the same algorithm in C as shown in this Lua implementation.
funcs={} for i=1,10 do table.insert(funcs, function() return i*i end) end funcs[2]() funcs[3]()
#include <stdio.h> #include <string.h> #include <stdlib.h> #include <sys/mman.h> typedef int (*f_int)(); #define TAG 0xdeadbeef int _tmpl() { volatile int x = TAG; return x * x; } #define PROT (PROT_EXEC | PROT_WRITE) #define FLAGS (MAP_PRIVATE | MAP_ANONYMOUS) f_int dupf(int v) { size_t len = (void*)dupf - (void*)_tmpl; f_int ret = mmap(NULL, len, PROT, FLAGS, 0, 0); char *p; if(ret == MAP_FAILED) { perror("mmap"); exit(-1); } memcpy(ret, _tmpl, len); for (p = (char*)ret; p < (char*)ret + len - sizeof(int); p++) if (*(int *)p == TAG) *(int *)p = v; return ret; } int main() { f_int funcs[10]; int i; for (i = 0; i < 10; i++) funcs[i] = dupf(i); for (i = 0; i < 9; i++) printf("func[%d]: %d\n", i, funcs[i]()); return 0; }
Convert this Lua snippet to C# and keep its semantics consistent.
funcs={} for i=1,10 do table.insert(funcs, function() return i*i end) end funcs[2]() funcs[3]()
using System; using System.Linq; class Program { static void Main() { var captor = (Func<int, Func<int>>)(number => () => number * number); var functions = Enumerable.Range(0, 10).Select(captor); foreach (var function in functions.Take(9)) { Console.WriteLine(function()); } } }
Rewrite this program in C# while keeping its functionality equivalent to the Lua version.
funcs={} for i=1,10 do table.insert(funcs, function() return i*i end) end funcs[2]() funcs[3]()
using System; using System.Linq; class Program { static void Main() { var captor = (Func<int, Func<int>>)(number => () => number * number); var functions = Enumerable.Range(0, 10).Select(captor); foreach (var function in functions.Take(9)) { Console.WriteLine(function()); } } }
Generate a C++ translation of this Lua snippet without changing its computational steps.
funcs={} for i=1,10 do table.insert(funcs, function() return i*i end) end funcs[2]() funcs[3]()
#include <iostream> #include <functional> #include <vector> int main() { std::vector<std::function<int()> > funcs; for (int i = 0; i < 10; i++) funcs.push_back([=]() { return i * i; }); for ( std::function<int( )> f : funcs ) std::cout << f( ) << std::endl ; return 0; }
Translate this program into C++ but keep the logic exactly as in Lua.
funcs={} for i=1,10 do table.insert(funcs, function() return i*i end) end funcs[2]() funcs[3]()
#include <iostream> #include <functional> #include <vector> int main() { std::vector<std::function<int()> > funcs; for (int i = 0; i < 10; i++) funcs.push_back([=]() { return i * i; }); for ( std::function<int( )> f : funcs ) std::cout << f( ) << std::endl ; return 0; }
Preserve the algorithm and functionality while converting the code from Lua to Java.
funcs={} for i=1,10 do table.insert(funcs, function() return i*i end) end funcs[2]() funcs[3]()
import java.util.function.Supplier; import java.util.ArrayList; public class ValueCapture { public static void main(String[] args) { ArrayList<Supplier<Integer>> funcs = new ArrayList<>(); for (int i = 0; i < 10; i++) { int j = i; funcs.add(() -> j * j); } Supplier<Integer> foo = funcs.get(3); System.out.println(foo.get()); } }
Change the programming language of this snippet from Lua to Java without modifying what it does.
funcs={} for i=1,10 do table.insert(funcs, function() return i*i end) end funcs[2]() funcs[3]()
import java.util.function.Supplier; import java.util.ArrayList; public class ValueCapture { public static void main(String[] args) { ArrayList<Supplier<Integer>> funcs = new ArrayList<>(); for (int i = 0; i < 10; i++) { int j = i; funcs.add(() -> j * j); } Supplier<Integer> foo = funcs.get(3); System.out.println(foo.get()); } }
Convert this Lua block to Python, preserving its control flow and logic.
funcs={} for i=1,10 do table.insert(funcs, function() return i*i end) end funcs[2]() funcs[3]()
funcs = [] for i in range(10): funcs.append(lambda: i * i) print funcs[3]()
Write the same code in Python as shown below in Lua.
funcs={} for i=1,10 do table.insert(funcs, function() return i*i end) end funcs[2]() funcs[3]()
funcs = [] for i in range(10): funcs.append(lambda: i * i) print funcs[3]()
Write the same algorithm in Go as shown in this Lua implementation.
funcs={} for i=1,10 do table.insert(funcs, function() return i*i end) end funcs[2]() funcs[3]()
package main import "fmt" func main() { fs := make([]func() int, 10) for i := range fs { i := i fs[i] = func() int { return i * i } } fmt.Println("func #0:", fs[0]()) fmt.Println("func #3:", fs[3]()) }
Translate the given Lua code snippet into Go without altering its behavior.
funcs={} for i=1,10 do table.insert(funcs, function() return i*i end) end funcs[2]() funcs[3]()
package main import "fmt" func main() { fs := make([]func() int, 10) for i := range fs { i := i fs[i] = func() int { return i * i } } fmt.Println("func #0:", fs[0]()) fmt.Println("func #3:", fs[3]()) }
Write a version of this Mathematica function in C with identical behavior.
Function[i, i^2 &] /@ Range@10 ->{1^2 &, 2^2 &, 3^2 &, 4^2 &, 5^2 &, 6^2 &, 7^2 &, 8^2 &, 9^2 &, 10^2 &} %[[2]][] ->4
#include <stdio.h> #include <string.h> #include <stdlib.h> #include <sys/mman.h> typedef int (*f_int)(); #define TAG 0xdeadbeef int _tmpl() { volatile int x = TAG; return x * x; } #define PROT (PROT_EXEC | PROT_WRITE) #define FLAGS (MAP_PRIVATE | MAP_ANONYMOUS) f_int dupf(int v) { size_t len = (void*)dupf - (void*)_tmpl; f_int ret = mmap(NULL, len, PROT, FLAGS, 0, 0); char *p; if(ret == MAP_FAILED) { perror("mmap"); exit(-1); } memcpy(ret, _tmpl, len); for (p = (char*)ret; p < (char*)ret + len - sizeof(int); p++) if (*(int *)p == TAG) *(int *)p = v; return ret; } int main() { f_int funcs[10]; int i; for (i = 0; i < 10; i++) funcs[i] = dupf(i); for (i = 0; i < 9; i++) printf("func[%d]: %d\n", i, funcs[i]()); return 0; }
Ensure the translated C code behaves exactly like the original Mathematica snippet.
Function[i, i^2 &] /@ Range@10 ->{1^2 &, 2^2 &, 3^2 &, 4^2 &, 5^2 &, 6^2 &, 7^2 &, 8^2 &, 9^2 &, 10^2 &} %[[2]][] ->4
#include <stdio.h> #include <string.h> #include <stdlib.h> #include <sys/mman.h> typedef int (*f_int)(); #define TAG 0xdeadbeef int _tmpl() { volatile int x = TAG; return x * x; } #define PROT (PROT_EXEC | PROT_WRITE) #define FLAGS (MAP_PRIVATE | MAP_ANONYMOUS) f_int dupf(int v) { size_t len = (void*)dupf - (void*)_tmpl; f_int ret = mmap(NULL, len, PROT, FLAGS, 0, 0); char *p; if(ret == MAP_FAILED) { perror("mmap"); exit(-1); } memcpy(ret, _tmpl, len); for (p = (char*)ret; p < (char*)ret + len - sizeof(int); p++) if (*(int *)p == TAG) *(int *)p = v; return ret; } int main() { f_int funcs[10]; int i; for (i = 0; i < 10; i++) funcs[i] = dupf(i); for (i = 0; i < 9; i++) printf("func[%d]: %d\n", i, funcs[i]()); return 0; }
Can you help me rewrite this code in C# instead of Mathematica, keeping it the same logically?
Function[i, i^2 &] /@ Range@10 ->{1^2 &, 2^2 &, 3^2 &, 4^2 &, 5^2 &, 6^2 &, 7^2 &, 8^2 &, 9^2 &, 10^2 &} %[[2]][] ->4
using System; using System.Linq; class Program { static void Main() { var captor = (Func<int, Func<int>>)(number => () => number * number); var functions = Enumerable.Range(0, 10).Select(captor); foreach (var function in functions.Take(9)) { Console.WriteLine(function()); } } }
Rewrite the snippet below in C# so it works the same as the original Mathematica code.
Function[i, i^2 &] /@ Range@10 ->{1^2 &, 2^2 &, 3^2 &, 4^2 &, 5^2 &, 6^2 &, 7^2 &, 8^2 &, 9^2 &, 10^2 &} %[[2]][] ->4
using System; using System.Linq; class Program { static void Main() { var captor = (Func<int, Func<int>>)(number => () => number * number); var functions = Enumerable.Range(0, 10).Select(captor); foreach (var function in functions.Take(9)) { Console.WriteLine(function()); } } }
Translate the given Mathematica code snippet into C++ without altering its behavior.
Function[i, i^2 &] /@ Range@10 ->{1^2 &, 2^2 &, 3^2 &, 4^2 &, 5^2 &, 6^2 &, 7^2 &, 8^2 &, 9^2 &, 10^2 &} %[[2]][] ->4
#include <iostream> #include <functional> #include <vector> int main() { std::vector<std::function<int()> > funcs; for (int i = 0; i < 10; i++) funcs.push_back([=]() { return i * i; }); for ( std::function<int( )> f : funcs ) std::cout << f( ) << std::endl ; return 0; }
Convert this Mathematica block to C++, preserving its control flow and logic.
Function[i, i^2 &] /@ Range@10 ->{1^2 &, 2^2 &, 3^2 &, 4^2 &, 5^2 &, 6^2 &, 7^2 &, 8^2 &, 9^2 &, 10^2 &} %[[2]][] ->4
#include <iostream> #include <functional> #include <vector> int main() { std::vector<std::function<int()> > funcs; for (int i = 0; i < 10; i++) funcs.push_back([=]() { return i * i; }); for ( std::function<int( )> f : funcs ) std::cout << f( ) << std::endl ; return 0; }
Maintain the same structure and functionality when rewriting this code in Java.
Function[i, i^2 &] /@ Range@10 ->{1^2 &, 2^2 &, 3^2 &, 4^2 &, 5^2 &, 6^2 &, 7^2 &, 8^2 &, 9^2 &, 10^2 &} %[[2]][] ->4
import java.util.function.Supplier; import java.util.ArrayList; public class ValueCapture { public static void main(String[] args) { ArrayList<Supplier<Integer>> funcs = new ArrayList<>(); for (int i = 0; i < 10; i++) { int j = i; funcs.add(() -> j * j); } Supplier<Integer> foo = funcs.get(3); System.out.println(foo.get()); } }
Convert this Mathematica snippet to Java and keep its semantics consistent.
Function[i, i^2 &] /@ Range@10 ->{1^2 &, 2^2 &, 3^2 &, 4^2 &, 5^2 &, 6^2 &, 7^2 &, 8^2 &, 9^2 &, 10^2 &} %[[2]][] ->4
import java.util.function.Supplier; import java.util.ArrayList; public class ValueCapture { public static void main(String[] args) { ArrayList<Supplier<Integer>> funcs = new ArrayList<>(); for (int i = 0; i < 10; i++) { int j = i; funcs.add(() -> j * j); } Supplier<Integer> foo = funcs.get(3); System.out.println(foo.get()); } }
Produce a functionally identical Python code for the snippet given in Mathematica.
Function[i, i^2 &] /@ Range@10 ->{1^2 &, 2^2 &, 3^2 &, 4^2 &, 5^2 &, 6^2 &, 7^2 &, 8^2 &, 9^2 &, 10^2 &} %[[2]][] ->4
funcs = [] for i in range(10): funcs.append(lambda: i * i) print funcs[3]()
Can you help me rewrite this code in Python instead of Mathematica, keeping it the same logically?
Function[i, i^2 &] /@ Range@10 ->{1^2 &, 2^2 &, 3^2 &, 4^2 &, 5^2 &, 6^2 &, 7^2 &, 8^2 &, 9^2 &, 10^2 &} %[[2]][] ->4
funcs = [] for i in range(10): funcs.append(lambda: i * i) print funcs[3]()
Rewrite the snippet below in Go so it works the same as the original Mathematica code.
Function[i, i^2 &] /@ Range@10 ->{1^2 &, 2^2 &, 3^2 &, 4^2 &, 5^2 &, 6^2 &, 7^2 &, 8^2 &, 9^2 &, 10^2 &} %[[2]][] ->4
package main import "fmt" func main() { fs := make([]func() int, 10) for i := range fs { i := i fs[i] = func() int { return i * i } } fmt.Println("func #0:", fs[0]()) fmt.Println("func #3:", fs[3]()) }
Change the following Mathematica code into Go without altering its purpose.
Function[i, i^2 &] /@ Range@10 ->{1^2 &, 2^2 &, 3^2 &, 4^2 &, 5^2 &, 6^2 &, 7^2 &, 8^2 &, 9^2 &, 10^2 &} %[[2]][] ->4
package main import "fmt" func main() { fs := make([]func() int, 10) for i := range fs { i := i fs[i] = func() int { return i * i } } fmt.Println("func #0:", fs[0]()) fmt.Println("func #3:", fs[3]()) }
Port the following code from Nim to C with equivalent syntax and logic.
var funcs: seq[proc(): int] = @[] for i in 0..9: (proc = let x = i funcs.add(proc (): int = x * x))() for i in 0..8: echo "func[", i, "]: ", funcs[i]()
#include <stdio.h> #include <string.h> #include <stdlib.h> #include <sys/mman.h> typedef int (*f_int)(); #define TAG 0xdeadbeef int _tmpl() { volatile int x = TAG; return x * x; } #define PROT (PROT_EXEC | PROT_WRITE) #define FLAGS (MAP_PRIVATE | MAP_ANONYMOUS) f_int dupf(int v) { size_t len = (void*)dupf - (void*)_tmpl; f_int ret = mmap(NULL, len, PROT, FLAGS, 0, 0); char *p; if(ret == MAP_FAILED) { perror("mmap"); exit(-1); } memcpy(ret, _tmpl, len); for (p = (char*)ret; p < (char*)ret + len - sizeof(int); p++) if (*(int *)p == TAG) *(int *)p = v; return ret; } int main() { f_int funcs[10]; int i; for (i = 0; i < 10; i++) funcs[i] = dupf(i); for (i = 0; i < 9; i++) printf("func[%d]: %d\n", i, funcs[i]()); return 0; }
Produce a language-to-language conversion: from Nim to C, same semantics.
var funcs: seq[proc(): int] = @[] for i in 0..9: (proc = let x = i funcs.add(proc (): int = x * x))() for i in 0..8: echo "func[", i, "]: ", funcs[i]()
#include <stdio.h> #include <string.h> #include <stdlib.h> #include <sys/mman.h> typedef int (*f_int)(); #define TAG 0xdeadbeef int _tmpl() { volatile int x = TAG; return x * x; } #define PROT (PROT_EXEC | PROT_WRITE) #define FLAGS (MAP_PRIVATE | MAP_ANONYMOUS) f_int dupf(int v) { size_t len = (void*)dupf - (void*)_tmpl; f_int ret = mmap(NULL, len, PROT, FLAGS, 0, 0); char *p; if(ret == MAP_FAILED) { perror("mmap"); exit(-1); } memcpy(ret, _tmpl, len); for (p = (char*)ret; p < (char*)ret + len - sizeof(int); p++) if (*(int *)p == TAG) *(int *)p = v; return ret; } int main() { f_int funcs[10]; int i; for (i = 0; i < 10; i++) funcs[i] = dupf(i); for (i = 0; i < 9; i++) printf("func[%d]: %d\n", i, funcs[i]()); return 0; }
Can you help me rewrite this code in C# instead of Nim, keeping it the same logically?
var funcs: seq[proc(): int] = @[] for i in 0..9: (proc = let x = i funcs.add(proc (): int = x * x))() for i in 0..8: echo "func[", i, "]: ", funcs[i]()
using System; using System.Linq; class Program { static void Main() { var captor = (Func<int, Func<int>>)(number => () => number * number); var functions = Enumerable.Range(0, 10).Select(captor); foreach (var function in functions.Take(9)) { Console.WriteLine(function()); } } }
Write the same algorithm in C# as shown in this Nim implementation.
var funcs: seq[proc(): int] = @[] for i in 0..9: (proc = let x = i funcs.add(proc (): int = x * x))() for i in 0..8: echo "func[", i, "]: ", funcs[i]()
using System; using System.Linq; class Program { static void Main() { var captor = (Func<int, Func<int>>)(number => () => number * number); var functions = Enumerable.Range(0, 10).Select(captor); foreach (var function in functions.Take(9)) { Console.WriteLine(function()); } } }
Rewrite the snippet below in C++ so it works the same as the original Nim code.
var funcs: seq[proc(): int] = @[] for i in 0..9: (proc = let x = i funcs.add(proc (): int = x * x))() for i in 0..8: echo "func[", i, "]: ", funcs[i]()
#include <iostream> #include <functional> #include <vector> int main() { std::vector<std::function<int()> > funcs; for (int i = 0; i < 10; i++) funcs.push_back([=]() { return i * i; }); for ( std::function<int( )> f : funcs ) std::cout << f( ) << std::endl ; return 0; }
Write the same code in C++ as shown below in Nim.
var funcs: seq[proc(): int] = @[] for i in 0..9: (proc = let x = i funcs.add(proc (): int = x * x))() for i in 0..8: echo "func[", i, "]: ", funcs[i]()
#include <iostream> #include <functional> #include <vector> int main() { std::vector<std::function<int()> > funcs; for (int i = 0; i < 10; i++) funcs.push_back([=]() { return i * i; }); for ( std::function<int( )> f : funcs ) std::cout << f( ) << std::endl ; return 0; }
Maintain the same structure and functionality when rewriting this code in Java.
var funcs: seq[proc(): int] = @[] for i in 0..9: (proc = let x = i funcs.add(proc (): int = x * x))() for i in 0..8: echo "func[", i, "]: ", funcs[i]()
import java.util.function.Supplier; import java.util.ArrayList; public class ValueCapture { public static void main(String[] args) { ArrayList<Supplier<Integer>> funcs = new ArrayList<>(); for (int i = 0; i < 10; i++) { int j = i; funcs.add(() -> j * j); } Supplier<Integer> foo = funcs.get(3); System.out.println(foo.get()); } }
Change the programming language of this snippet from Nim to Java without modifying what it does.
var funcs: seq[proc(): int] = @[] for i in 0..9: (proc = let x = i funcs.add(proc (): int = x * x))() for i in 0..8: echo "func[", i, "]: ", funcs[i]()
import java.util.function.Supplier; import java.util.ArrayList; public class ValueCapture { public static void main(String[] args) { ArrayList<Supplier<Integer>> funcs = new ArrayList<>(); for (int i = 0; i < 10; i++) { int j = i; funcs.add(() -> j * j); } Supplier<Integer> foo = funcs.get(3); System.out.println(foo.get()); } }
Preserve the algorithm and functionality while converting the code from Nim to Python.
var funcs: seq[proc(): int] = @[] for i in 0..9: (proc = let x = i funcs.add(proc (): int = x * x))() for i in 0..8: echo "func[", i, "]: ", funcs[i]()
funcs = [] for i in range(10): funcs.append(lambda: i * i) print funcs[3]()
Can you help me rewrite this code in Python instead of Nim, keeping it the same logically?
var funcs: seq[proc(): int] = @[] for i in 0..9: (proc = let x = i funcs.add(proc (): int = x * x))() for i in 0..8: echo "func[", i, "]: ", funcs[i]()
funcs = [] for i in range(10): funcs.append(lambda: i * i) print funcs[3]()
Transform the following Nim implementation into Go, maintaining the same output and logic.
var funcs: seq[proc(): int] = @[] for i in 0..9: (proc = let x = i funcs.add(proc (): int = x * x))() for i in 0..8: echo "func[", i, "]: ", funcs[i]()
package main import "fmt" func main() { fs := make([]func() int, 10) for i := range fs { i := i fs[i] = func() int { return i * i } } fmt.Println("func #0:", fs[0]()) fmt.Println("func #3:", fs[3]()) }
Convert this Nim block to Go, preserving its control flow and logic.
var funcs: seq[proc(): int] = @[] for i in 0..9: (proc = let x = i funcs.add(proc (): int = x * x))() for i in 0..8: echo "func[", i, "]: ", funcs[i]()
package main import "fmt" func main() { fs := make([]func() int, 10) for i := range fs { i := i fs[i] = func() int { return i * i } } fmt.Println("func #0:", fs[0]()) fmt.Println("func #3:", fs[3]()) }
Rewrite this program in C while keeping its functionality equivalent to the OCaml version.
let () = let cls = Array.init 10 (fun i -> (function () -> i * i)) in Random.self_init (); for i = 1 to 6 do let x = Random.int 9 in Printf.printf " fun.(%d) = %d\n" x (cls.(x) ()); done
#include <stdio.h> #include <string.h> #include <stdlib.h> #include <sys/mman.h> typedef int (*f_int)(); #define TAG 0xdeadbeef int _tmpl() { volatile int x = TAG; return x * x; } #define PROT (PROT_EXEC | PROT_WRITE) #define FLAGS (MAP_PRIVATE | MAP_ANONYMOUS) f_int dupf(int v) { size_t len = (void*)dupf - (void*)_tmpl; f_int ret = mmap(NULL, len, PROT, FLAGS, 0, 0); char *p; if(ret == MAP_FAILED) { perror("mmap"); exit(-1); } memcpy(ret, _tmpl, len); for (p = (char*)ret; p < (char*)ret + len - sizeof(int); p++) if (*(int *)p == TAG) *(int *)p = v; return ret; } int main() { f_int funcs[10]; int i; for (i = 0; i < 10; i++) funcs[i] = dupf(i); for (i = 0; i < 9; i++) printf("func[%d]: %d\n", i, funcs[i]()); return 0; }
Generate a C translation of this OCaml snippet without changing its computational steps.
let () = let cls = Array.init 10 (fun i -> (function () -> i * i)) in Random.self_init (); for i = 1 to 6 do let x = Random.int 9 in Printf.printf " fun.(%d) = %d\n" x (cls.(x) ()); done
#include <stdio.h> #include <string.h> #include <stdlib.h> #include <sys/mman.h> typedef int (*f_int)(); #define TAG 0xdeadbeef int _tmpl() { volatile int x = TAG; return x * x; } #define PROT (PROT_EXEC | PROT_WRITE) #define FLAGS (MAP_PRIVATE | MAP_ANONYMOUS) f_int dupf(int v) { size_t len = (void*)dupf - (void*)_tmpl; f_int ret = mmap(NULL, len, PROT, FLAGS, 0, 0); char *p; if(ret == MAP_FAILED) { perror("mmap"); exit(-1); } memcpy(ret, _tmpl, len); for (p = (char*)ret; p < (char*)ret + len - sizeof(int); p++) if (*(int *)p == TAG) *(int *)p = v; return ret; } int main() { f_int funcs[10]; int i; for (i = 0; i < 10; i++) funcs[i] = dupf(i); for (i = 0; i < 9; i++) printf("func[%d]: %d\n", i, funcs[i]()); return 0; }
Translate this program into C# but keep the logic exactly as in OCaml.
let () = let cls = Array.init 10 (fun i -> (function () -> i * i)) in Random.self_init (); for i = 1 to 6 do let x = Random.int 9 in Printf.printf " fun.(%d) = %d\n" x (cls.(x) ()); done
using System; using System.Linq; class Program { static void Main() { var captor = (Func<int, Func<int>>)(number => () => number * number); var functions = Enumerable.Range(0, 10).Select(captor); foreach (var function in functions.Take(9)) { Console.WriteLine(function()); } } }
Transform the following OCaml implementation into C#, maintaining the same output and logic.
let () = let cls = Array.init 10 (fun i -> (function () -> i * i)) in Random.self_init (); for i = 1 to 6 do let x = Random.int 9 in Printf.printf " fun.(%d) = %d\n" x (cls.(x) ()); done
using System; using System.Linq; class Program { static void Main() { var captor = (Func<int, Func<int>>)(number => () => number * number); var functions = Enumerable.Range(0, 10).Select(captor); foreach (var function in functions.Take(9)) { Console.WriteLine(function()); } } }
Change the following OCaml code into C++ without altering its purpose.
let () = let cls = Array.init 10 (fun i -> (function () -> i * i)) in Random.self_init (); for i = 1 to 6 do let x = Random.int 9 in Printf.printf " fun.(%d) = %d\n" x (cls.(x) ()); done
#include <iostream> #include <functional> #include <vector> int main() { std::vector<std::function<int()> > funcs; for (int i = 0; i < 10; i++) funcs.push_back([=]() { return i * i; }); for ( std::function<int( )> f : funcs ) std::cout << f( ) << std::endl ; return 0; }
Generate a C++ translation of this OCaml snippet without changing its computational steps.
let () = let cls = Array.init 10 (fun i -> (function () -> i * i)) in Random.self_init (); for i = 1 to 6 do let x = Random.int 9 in Printf.printf " fun.(%d) = %d\n" x (cls.(x) ()); done
#include <iostream> #include <functional> #include <vector> int main() { std::vector<std::function<int()> > funcs; for (int i = 0; i < 10; i++) funcs.push_back([=]() { return i * i; }); for ( std::function<int( )> f : funcs ) std::cout << f( ) << std::endl ; return 0; }
Keep all operations the same but rewrite the snippet in Java.
let () = let cls = Array.init 10 (fun i -> (function () -> i * i)) in Random.self_init (); for i = 1 to 6 do let x = Random.int 9 in Printf.printf " fun.(%d) = %d\n" x (cls.(x) ()); done
import java.util.function.Supplier; import java.util.ArrayList; public class ValueCapture { public static void main(String[] args) { ArrayList<Supplier<Integer>> funcs = new ArrayList<>(); for (int i = 0; i < 10; i++) { int j = i; funcs.add(() -> j * j); } Supplier<Integer> foo = funcs.get(3); System.out.println(foo.get()); } }
Rewrite the snippet below in Java so it works the same as the original OCaml code.
let () = let cls = Array.init 10 (fun i -> (function () -> i * i)) in Random.self_init (); for i = 1 to 6 do let x = Random.int 9 in Printf.printf " fun.(%d) = %d\n" x (cls.(x) ()); done
import java.util.function.Supplier; import java.util.ArrayList; public class ValueCapture { public static void main(String[] args) { ArrayList<Supplier<Integer>> funcs = new ArrayList<>(); for (int i = 0; i < 10; i++) { int j = i; funcs.add(() -> j * j); } Supplier<Integer> foo = funcs.get(3); System.out.println(foo.get()); } }
Produce a functionally identical Python code for the snippet given in OCaml.
let () = let cls = Array.init 10 (fun i -> (function () -> i * i)) in Random.self_init (); for i = 1 to 6 do let x = Random.int 9 in Printf.printf " fun.(%d) = %d\n" x (cls.(x) ()); done
funcs = [] for i in range(10): funcs.append(lambda: i * i) print funcs[3]()
Convert this OCaml block to Python, preserving its control flow and logic.
let () = let cls = Array.init 10 (fun i -> (function () -> i * i)) in Random.self_init (); for i = 1 to 6 do let x = Random.int 9 in Printf.printf " fun.(%d) = %d\n" x (cls.(x) ()); done
funcs = [] for i in range(10): funcs.append(lambda: i * i) print funcs[3]()
Rewrite the snippet below in Go so it works the same as the original OCaml code.
let () = let cls = Array.init 10 (fun i -> (function () -> i * i)) in Random.self_init (); for i = 1 to 6 do let x = Random.int 9 in Printf.printf " fun.(%d) = %d\n" x (cls.(x) ()); done
package main import "fmt" func main() { fs := make([]func() int, 10) for i := range fs { i := i fs[i] = func() int { return i * i } } fmt.Println("func #0:", fs[0]()) fmt.Println("func #3:", fs[3]()) }
Port the following code from OCaml to Go with equivalent syntax and logic.
let () = let cls = Array.init 10 (fun i -> (function () -> i * i)) in Random.self_init (); for i = 1 to 6 do let x = Random.int 9 in Printf.printf " fun.(%d) = %d\n" x (cls.(x) ()); done
package main import "fmt" func main() { fs := make([]func() int, 10) for i := range fs { i := i fs[i] = func() int { return i * i } } fmt.Println("func #0:", fs[0]()) fmt.Println("func #3:", fs[3]()) }
Transform the following Perl implementation into C, maintaining the same output and logic.
my @f = map(sub { $_ * $_ }, 0 .. 9); print $f[$_](), "\n" for (0 .. 8);
#include <stdio.h> #include <string.h> #include <stdlib.h> #include <sys/mman.h> typedef int (*f_int)(); #define TAG 0xdeadbeef int _tmpl() { volatile int x = TAG; return x * x; } #define PROT (PROT_EXEC | PROT_WRITE) #define FLAGS (MAP_PRIVATE | MAP_ANONYMOUS) f_int dupf(int v) { size_t len = (void*)dupf - (void*)_tmpl; f_int ret = mmap(NULL, len, PROT, FLAGS, 0, 0); char *p; if(ret == MAP_FAILED) { perror("mmap"); exit(-1); } memcpy(ret, _tmpl, len); for (p = (char*)ret; p < (char*)ret + len - sizeof(int); p++) if (*(int *)p == TAG) *(int *)p = v; return ret; } int main() { f_int funcs[10]; int i; for (i = 0; i < 10; i++) funcs[i] = dupf(i); for (i = 0; i < 9; i++) printf("func[%d]: %d\n", i, funcs[i]()); return 0; }
Generate an equivalent C version of this Perl code.
my @f = map(sub { $_ * $_ }, 0 .. 9); print $f[$_](), "\n" for (0 .. 8);
#include <stdio.h> #include <string.h> #include <stdlib.h> #include <sys/mman.h> typedef int (*f_int)(); #define TAG 0xdeadbeef int _tmpl() { volatile int x = TAG; return x * x; } #define PROT (PROT_EXEC | PROT_WRITE) #define FLAGS (MAP_PRIVATE | MAP_ANONYMOUS) f_int dupf(int v) { size_t len = (void*)dupf - (void*)_tmpl; f_int ret = mmap(NULL, len, PROT, FLAGS, 0, 0); char *p; if(ret == MAP_FAILED) { perror("mmap"); exit(-1); } memcpy(ret, _tmpl, len); for (p = (char*)ret; p < (char*)ret + len - sizeof(int); p++) if (*(int *)p == TAG) *(int *)p = v; return ret; } int main() { f_int funcs[10]; int i; for (i = 0; i < 10; i++) funcs[i] = dupf(i); for (i = 0; i < 9; i++) printf("func[%d]: %d\n", i, funcs[i]()); return 0; }
Write a version of this Perl function in C# with identical behavior.
my @f = map(sub { $_ * $_ }, 0 .. 9); print $f[$_](), "\n" for (0 .. 8);
using System; using System.Linq; class Program { static void Main() { var captor = (Func<int, Func<int>>)(number => () => number * number); var functions = Enumerable.Range(0, 10).Select(captor); foreach (var function in functions.Take(9)) { Console.WriteLine(function()); } } }
Transform the following Perl implementation into C#, maintaining the same output and logic.
my @f = map(sub { $_ * $_ }, 0 .. 9); print $f[$_](), "\n" for (0 .. 8);
using System; using System.Linq; class Program { static void Main() { var captor = (Func<int, Func<int>>)(number => () => number * number); var functions = Enumerable.Range(0, 10).Select(captor); foreach (var function in functions.Take(9)) { Console.WriteLine(function()); } } }
Please provide an equivalent version of this Perl code in C++.
my @f = map(sub { $_ * $_ }, 0 .. 9); print $f[$_](), "\n" for (0 .. 8);
#include <iostream> #include <functional> #include <vector> int main() { std::vector<std::function<int()> > funcs; for (int i = 0; i < 10; i++) funcs.push_back([=]() { return i * i; }); for ( std::function<int( )> f : funcs ) std::cout << f( ) << std::endl ; return 0; }
Please provide an equivalent version of this Perl code in C++.
my @f = map(sub { $_ * $_ }, 0 .. 9); print $f[$_](), "\n" for (0 .. 8);
#include <iostream> #include <functional> #include <vector> int main() { std::vector<std::function<int()> > funcs; for (int i = 0; i < 10; i++) funcs.push_back([=]() { return i * i; }); for ( std::function<int( )> f : funcs ) std::cout << f( ) << std::endl ; return 0; }
Port the provided Perl code into Java while preserving the original functionality.
my @f = map(sub { $_ * $_ }, 0 .. 9); print $f[$_](), "\n" for (0 .. 8);
import java.util.function.Supplier; import java.util.ArrayList; public class ValueCapture { public static void main(String[] args) { ArrayList<Supplier<Integer>> funcs = new ArrayList<>(); for (int i = 0; i < 10; i++) { int j = i; funcs.add(() -> j * j); } Supplier<Integer> foo = funcs.get(3); System.out.println(foo.get()); } }
Generate a Java translation of this Perl snippet without changing its computational steps.
my @f = map(sub { $_ * $_ }, 0 .. 9); print $f[$_](), "\n" for (0 .. 8);
import java.util.function.Supplier; import java.util.ArrayList; public class ValueCapture { public static void main(String[] args) { ArrayList<Supplier<Integer>> funcs = new ArrayList<>(); for (int i = 0; i < 10; i++) { int j = i; funcs.add(() -> j * j); } Supplier<Integer> foo = funcs.get(3); System.out.println(foo.get()); } }
Generate an equivalent Python version of this Perl code.
my @f = map(sub { $_ * $_ }, 0 .. 9); print $f[$_](), "\n" for (0 .. 8);
funcs = [] for i in range(10): funcs.append(lambda: i * i) print funcs[3]()
Produce a language-to-language conversion: from Perl to Python, same semantics.
my @f = map(sub { $_ * $_ }, 0 .. 9); print $f[$_](), "\n" for (0 .. 8);
funcs = [] for i in range(10): funcs.append(lambda: i * i) print funcs[3]()
Produce a language-to-language conversion: from Perl to Go, same semantics.
my @f = map(sub { $_ * $_ }, 0 .. 9); print $f[$_](), "\n" for (0 .. 8);
package main import "fmt" func main() { fs := make([]func() int, 10) for i := range fs { i := i fs[i] = func() int { return i * i } } fmt.Println("func #0:", fs[0]()) fmt.Println("func #3:", fs[3]()) }
Change the programming language of this snippet from Perl to Go without modifying what it does.
my @f = map(sub { $_ * $_ }, 0 .. 9); print $f[$_](), "\n" for (0 .. 8);
package main import "fmt" func main() { fs := make([]func() int, 10) for i := range fs { i := i fs[i] = func() int { return i * i } } fmt.Println("func #0:", fs[0]()) fmt.Println("func #3:", fs[3]()) }
Change the programming language of this snippet from PowerShell to C without modifying what it does.
function Get-Closure ([double]$Number) { {param([double]$Sum) return $script:Number *= $Sum}.GetNewClosure() }
#include <stdio.h> #include <string.h> #include <stdlib.h> #include <sys/mman.h> typedef int (*f_int)(); #define TAG 0xdeadbeef int _tmpl() { volatile int x = TAG; return x * x; } #define PROT (PROT_EXEC | PROT_WRITE) #define FLAGS (MAP_PRIVATE | MAP_ANONYMOUS) f_int dupf(int v) { size_t len = (void*)dupf - (void*)_tmpl; f_int ret = mmap(NULL, len, PROT, FLAGS, 0, 0); char *p; if(ret == MAP_FAILED) { perror("mmap"); exit(-1); } memcpy(ret, _tmpl, len); for (p = (char*)ret; p < (char*)ret + len - sizeof(int); p++) if (*(int *)p == TAG) *(int *)p = v; return ret; } int main() { f_int funcs[10]; int i; for (i = 0; i < 10; i++) funcs[i] = dupf(i); for (i = 0; i < 9; i++) printf("func[%d]: %d\n", i, funcs[i]()); return 0; }
Produce a language-to-language conversion: from PowerShell to C, same semantics.
function Get-Closure ([double]$Number) { {param([double]$Sum) return $script:Number *= $Sum}.GetNewClosure() }
#include <stdio.h> #include <string.h> #include <stdlib.h> #include <sys/mman.h> typedef int (*f_int)(); #define TAG 0xdeadbeef int _tmpl() { volatile int x = TAG; return x * x; } #define PROT (PROT_EXEC | PROT_WRITE) #define FLAGS (MAP_PRIVATE | MAP_ANONYMOUS) f_int dupf(int v) { size_t len = (void*)dupf - (void*)_tmpl; f_int ret = mmap(NULL, len, PROT, FLAGS, 0, 0); char *p; if(ret == MAP_FAILED) { perror("mmap"); exit(-1); } memcpy(ret, _tmpl, len); for (p = (char*)ret; p < (char*)ret + len - sizeof(int); p++) if (*(int *)p == TAG) *(int *)p = v; return ret; } int main() { f_int funcs[10]; int i; for (i = 0; i < 10; i++) funcs[i] = dupf(i); for (i = 0; i < 9; i++) printf("func[%d]: %d\n", i, funcs[i]()); return 0; }
Change the programming language of this snippet from PowerShell to C# without modifying what it does.
function Get-Closure ([double]$Number) { {param([double]$Sum) return $script:Number *= $Sum}.GetNewClosure() }
using System; using System.Linq; class Program { static void Main() { var captor = (Func<int, Func<int>>)(number => () => number * number); var functions = Enumerable.Range(0, 10).Select(captor); foreach (var function in functions.Take(9)) { Console.WriteLine(function()); } } }
Can you help me rewrite this code in C# instead of PowerShell, keeping it the same logically?
function Get-Closure ([double]$Number) { {param([double]$Sum) return $script:Number *= $Sum}.GetNewClosure() }
using System; using System.Linq; class Program { static void Main() { var captor = (Func<int, Func<int>>)(number => () => number * number); var functions = Enumerable.Range(0, 10).Select(captor); foreach (var function in functions.Take(9)) { Console.WriteLine(function()); } } }
Rewrite the snippet below in C++ so it works the same as the original PowerShell code.
function Get-Closure ([double]$Number) { {param([double]$Sum) return $script:Number *= $Sum}.GetNewClosure() }
#include <iostream> #include <functional> #include <vector> int main() { std::vector<std::function<int()> > funcs; for (int i = 0; i < 10; i++) funcs.push_back([=]() { return i * i; }); for ( std::function<int( )> f : funcs ) std::cout << f( ) << std::endl ; return 0; }
Maintain the same structure and functionality when rewriting this code in C++.
function Get-Closure ([double]$Number) { {param([double]$Sum) return $script:Number *= $Sum}.GetNewClosure() }
#include <iostream> #include <functional> #include <vector> int main() { std::vector<std::function<int()> > funcs; for (int i = 0; i < 10; i++) funcs.push_back([=]() { return i * i; }); for ( std::function<int( )> f : funcs ) std::cout << f( ) << std::endl ; return 0; }
Convert this PowerShell block to Java, preserving its control flow and logic.
function Get-Closure ([double]$Number) { {param([double]$Sum) return $script:Number *= $Sum}.GetNewClosure() }
import java.util.function.Supplier; import java.util.ArrayList; public class ValueCapture { public static void main(String[] args) { ArrayList<Supplier<Integer>> funcs = new ArrayList<>(); for (int i = 0; i < 10; i++) { int j = i; funcs.add(() -> j * j); } Supplier<Integer> foo = funcs.get(3); System.out.println(foo.get()); } }
Maintain the same structure and functionality when rewriting this code in Java.
function Get-Closure ([double]$Number) { {param([double]$Sum) return $script:Number *= $Sum}.GetNewClosure() }
import java.util.function.Supplier; import java.util.ArrayList; public class ValueCapture { public static void main(String[] args) { ArrayList<Supplier<Integer>> funcs = new ArrayList<>(); for (int i = 0; i < 10; i++) { int j = i; funcs.add(() -> j * j); } Supplier<Integer> foo = funcs.get(3); System.out.println(foo.get()); } }
Produce a functionally identical Python code for the snippet given in PowerShell.
function Get-Closure ([double]$Number) { {param([double]$Sum) return $script:Number *= $Sum}.GetNewClosure() }
funcs = [] for i in range(10): funcs.append(lambda: i * i) print funcs[3]()
Generate a Python translation of this PowerShell snippet without changing its computational steps.
function Get-Closure ([double]$Number) { {param([double]$Sum) return $script:Number *= $Sum}.GetNewClosure() }
funcs = [] for i in range(10): funcs.append(lambda: i * i) print funcs[3]()
Maintain the same structure and functionality when rewriting this code in Go.
function Get-Closure ([double]$Number) { {param([double]$Sum) return $script:Number *= $Sum}.GetNewClosure() }
package main import "fmt" func main() { fs := make([]func() int, 10) for i := range fs { i := i fs[i] = func() int { return i * i } } fmt.Println("func #0:", fs[0]()) fmt.Println("func #3:", fs[3]()) }
Produce a language-to-language conversion: from PowerShell to Go, same semantics.
function Get-Closure ([double]$Number) { {param([double]$Sum) return $script:Number *= $Sum}.GetNewClosure() }
package main import "fmt" func main() { fs := make([]func() int, 10) for i := range fs { i := i fs[i] = func() int { return i * i } } fmt.Println("func #0:", fs[0]()) fmt.Println("func #3:", fs[3]()) }
Write the same code in C as shown below in R.
s <- sapply (1:10, function (x) { x function (i=x) i*i }) s[[5]]() [1] 25
#include <stdio.h> #include <string.h> #include <stdlib.h> #include <sys/mman.h> typedef int (*f_int)(); #define TAG 0xdeadbeef int _tmpl() { volatile int x = TAG; return x * x; } #define PROT (PROT_EXEC | PROT_WRITE) #define FLAGS (MAP_PRIVATE | MAP_ANONYMOUS) f_int dupf(int v) { size_t len = (void*)dupf - (void*)_tmpl; f_int ret = mmap(NULL, len, PROT, FLAGS, 0, 0); char *p; if(ret == MAP_FAILED) { perror("mmap"); exit(-1); } memcpy(ret, _tmpl, len); for (p = (char*)ret; p < (char*)ret + len - sizeof(int); p++) if (*(int *)p == TAG) *(int *)p = v; return ret; } int main() { f_int funcs[10]; int i; for (i = 0; i < 10; i++) funcs[i] = dupf(i); for (i = 0; i < 9; i++) printf("func[%d]: %d\n", i, funcs[i]()); return 0; }
Produce a language-to-language conversion: from R to C, same semantics.
s <- sapply (1:10, function (x) { x function (i=x) i*i }) s[[5]]() [1] 25
#include <stdio.h> #include <string.h> #include <stdlib.h> #include <sys/mman.h> typedef int (*f_int)(); #define TAG 0xdeadbeef int _tmpl() { volatile int x = TAG; return x * x; } #define PROT (PROT_EXEC | PROT_WRITE) #define FLAGS (MAP_PRIVATE | MAP_ANONYMOUS) f_int dupf(int v) { size_t len = (void*)dupf - (void*)_tmpl; f_int ret = mmap(NULL, len, PROT, FLAGS, 0, 0); char *p; if(ret == MAP_FAILED) { perror("mmap"); exit(-1); } memcpy(ret, _tmpl, len); for (p = (char*)ret; p < (char*)ret + len - sizeof(int); p++) if (*(int *)p == TAG) *(int *)p = v; return ret; } int main() { f_int funcs[10]; int i; for (i = 0; i < 10; i++) funcs[i] = dupf(i); for (i = 0; i < 9; i++) printf("func[%d]: %d\n", i, funcs[i]()); return 0; }
Produce a functionally identical C# code for the snippet given in R.
s <- sapply (1:10, function (x) { x function (i=x) i*i }) s[[5]]() [1] 25
using System; using System.Linq; class Program { static void Main() { var captor = (Func<int, Func<int>>)(number => () => number * number); var functions = Enumerable.Range(0, 10).Select(captor); foreach (var function in functions.Take(9)) { Console.WriteLine(function()); } } }
Port the following code from R to C# with equivalent syntax and logic.
s <- sapply (1:10, function (x) { x function (i=x) i*i }) s[[5]]() [1] 25
using System; using System.Linq; class Program { static void Main() { var captor = (Func<int, Func<int>>)(number => () => number * number); var functions = Enumerable.Range(0, 10).Select(captor); foreach (var function in functions.Take(9)) { Console.WriteLine(function()); } } }
Produce a functionally identical C++ code for the snippet given in R.
s <- sapply (1:10, function (x) { x function (i=x) i*i }) s[[5]]() [1] 25
#include <iostream> #include <functional> #include <vector> int main() { std::vector<std::function<int()> > funcs; for (int i = 0; i < 10; i++) funcs.push_back([=]() { return i * i; }); for ( std::function<int( )> f : funcs ) std::cout << f( ) << std::endl ; return 0; }
Ensure the translated C++ code behaves exactly like the original R snippet.
s <- sapply (1:10, function (x) { x function (i=x) i*i }) s[[5]]() [1] 25
#include <iostream> #include <functional> #include <vector> int main() { std::vector<std::function<int()> > funcs; for (int i = 0; i < 10; i++) funcs.push_back([=]() { return i * i; }); for ( std::function<int( )> f : funcs ) std::cout << f( ) << std::endl ; return 0; }
Translate this program into Java but keep the logic exactly as in R.
s <- sapply (1:10, function (x) { x function (i=x) i*i }) s[[5]]() [1] 25
import java.util.function.Supplier; import java.util.ArrayList; public class ValueCapture { public static void main(String[] args) { ArrayList<Supplier<Integer>> funcs = new ArrayList<>(); for (int i = 0; i < 10; i++) { int j = i; funcs.add(() -> j * j); } Supplier<Integer> foo = funcs.get(3); System.out.println(foo.get()); } }
Keep all operations the same but rewrite the snippet in Java.
s <- sapply (1:10, function (x) { x function (i=x) i*i }) s[[5]]() [1] 25
import java.util.function.Supplier; import java.util.ArrayList; public class ValueCapture { public static void main(String[] args) { ArrayList<Supplier<Integer>> funcs = new ArrayList<>(); for (int i = 0; i < 10; i++) { int j = i; funcs.add(() -> j * j); } Supplier<Integer> foo = funcs.get(3); System.out.println(foo.get()); } }
Port the following code from R to Python with equivalent syntax and logic.
s <- sapply (1:10, function (x) { x function (i=x) i*i }) s[[5]]() [1] 25
funcs = [] for i in range(10): funcs.append(lambda: i * i) print funcs[3]()
Convert this R snippet to Python and keep its semantics consistent.
s <- sapply (1:10, function (x) { x function (i=x) i*i }) s[[5]]() [1] 25
funcs = [] for i in range(10): funcs.append(lambda: i * i) print funcs[3]()
Port the provided R code into Go while preserving the original functionality.
s <- sapply (1:10, function (x) { x function (i=x) i*i }) s[[5]]() [1] 25
package main import "fmt" func main() { fs := make([]func() int, 10) for i := range fs { i := i fs[i] = func() int { return i * i } } fmt.Println("func #0:", fs[0]()) fmt.Println("func #3:", fs[3]()) }