Instruction
stringlengths
45
106
input_code
stringlengths
1
13.7k
output_code
stringlengths
1
13.7k
Write the same algorithm in C as shown in this Icon implementation.
record mutable(value) procedure main(arglist) k := integer(arglist[1])|10 write("Man or Boy = ", A( k, 1, -1, -1, 1, 0 ) ) end procedure eval(ref) return if type(ref) == "co-expression" then @ref else ref end procedure A(k,x1,x2,x3,x4,x5) k := mutable(k) return if k.value <= 0 then eval(x4) + eval(x5) else B(k,x1,x2,x3,x4,x5) end procedure B(k,x1,x2,x3,x4,x5) k.value -:= 1 return A(k.value, create |B(k,x1,x2,x3,x4,x5),x1,x2,x3,x4) end
#include <stdio.h> #include <stdlib.h> typedef struct arg { int (*fn)(struct arg*); int *k; struct arg *x1, *x2, *x3, *x4, *x5; } ARG; int f_1 (ARG* _) { return -1; } int f0 (ARG* _) { return 0; } int f1 (ARG* _) { return 1; } int eval(ARG* a) { return a->fn(a); } #define MAKE_ARG(...) (&(ARG){__VA_ARGS__}) #define FUN(...) MAKE_ARG(B, &k, __VA_ARGS__) int A(ARG*); int B(ARG* a) { int k = *a->k -= 1; return A(FUN(a, a->x1, a->x2, a->x3, a->x4)); } int A(ARG* a) { return *a->k <= 0 ? eval(a->x4) + eval(a->x5) : B(a); } int main(int argc, char **argv) { int k = argc == 2 ? strtol(argv[1], 0, 0) : 10; printf("%d\n", A(FUN(MAKE_ARG(f1), MAKE_ARG(f_1), MAKE_ARG(f_1), MAKE_ARG(f1), MAKE_ARG(f0)))); return 0; }
Convert this Icon block to C#, preserving its control flow and logic.
record mutable(value) procedure main(arglist) k := integer(arglist[1])|10 write("Man or Boy = ", A( k, 1, -1, -1, 1, 0 ) ) end procedure eval(ref) return if type(ref) == "co-expression" then @ref else ref end procedure A(k,x1,x2,x3,x4,x5) k := mutable(k) return if k.value <= 0 then eval(x4) + eval(x5) else B(k,x1,x2,x3,x4,x5) end procedure B(k,x1,x2,x3,x4,x5) k.value -:= 1 return A(k.value, create |B(k,x1,x2,x3,x4,x5),x1,x2,x3,x4) end
using System; delegate T Func<T>(); class ManOrBoy { static void Main() { Console.WriteLine(A(10, C(1), C(-1), C(-1), C(1), C(0))); } static Func<int> C(int i) { return delegate { return i; }; } static int A(int k, Func<int> x1, Func<int> x2, Func<int> x3, Func<int> x4, Func<int> x5) { Func<int> b = null; b = delegate { k--; return A(k, b, x1, x2, x3, x4); }; return k <= 0 ? x4() + x5() : b(); } }
Produce a functionally identical C++ code for the snippet given in Icon.
record mutable(value) procedure main(arglist) k := integer(arglist[1])|10 write("Man or Boy = ", A( k, 1, -1, -1, 1, 0 ) ) end procedure eval(ref) return if type(ref) == "co-expression" then @ref else ref end procedure A(k,x1,x2,x3,x4,x5) k := mutable(k) return if k.value <= 0 then eval(x4) + eval(x5) else B(k,x1,x2,x3,x4,x5) end procedure B(k,x1,x2,x3,x4,x5) k.value -:= 1 return A(k.value, create |B(k,x1,x2,x3,x4,x5),x1,x2,x3,x4) end
#include <iostream> #include <tr1/memory> using std::tr1::shared_ptr; using std::tr1::enable_shared_from_this; struct Arg { virtual int run() = 0; virtual ~Arg() { }; }; int A(int, shared_ptr<Arg>, shared_ptr<Arg>, shared_ptr<Arg>, shared_ptr<Arg>, shared_ptr<Arg>); class B : public Arg, public enable_shared_from_this<B> { private: int k; const shared_ptr<Arg> x1, x2, x3, x4; public: B(int _k, shared_ptr<Arg> _x1, shared_ptr<Arg> _x2, shared_ptr<Arg> _x3, shared_ptr<Arg> _x4) : k(_k), x1(_x1), x2(_x2), x3(_x3), x4(_x4) { } int run() { return A(--k, shared_from_this(), x1, x2, x3, x4); } }; class Const : public Arg { private: const int x; public: Const(int _x) : x(_x) { } int run () { return x; } }; int A(int k, shared_ptr<Arg> x1, shared_ptr<Arg> x2, shared_ptr<Arg> x3, shared_ptr<Arg> x4, shared_ptr<Arg> x5) { if (k <= 0) return x4->run() + x5->run(); else { shared_ptr<Arg> b(new B(k, x1, x2, x3, x4)); return b->run(); } } int main() { std::cout << A(10, shared_ptr<Arg>(new Const(1)), shared_ptr<Arg>(new Const(-1)), shared_ptr<Arg>(new Const(-1)), shared_ptr<Arg>(new Const(1)), shared_ptr<Arg>(new Const(0))) << std::endl; return 0; }
Translate the given Icon code snippet into Java without altering its behavior.
record mutable(value) procedure main(arglist) k := integer(arglist[1])|10 write("Man or Boy = ", A( k, 1, -1, -1, 1, 0 ) ) end procedure eval(ref) return if type(ref) == "co-expression" then @ref else ref end procedure A(k,x1,x2,x3,x4,x5) k := mutable(k) return if k.value <= 0 then eval(x4) + eval(x5) else B(k,x1,x2,x3,x4,x5) end procedure B(k,x1,x2,x3,x4,x5) k.value -:= 1 return A(k.value, create |B(k,x1,x2,x3,x4,x5),x1,x2,x3,x4) end
import java.util.function.DoubleSupplier; public class ManOrBoy { static double A(int k, DoubleSupplier x1, DoubleSupplier x2, DoubleSupplier x3, DoubleSupplier x4, DoubleSupplier x5) { DoubleSupplier B = new DoubleSupplier() { int m = k; public double getAsDouble() { return A(--m, this, x1, x2, x3, x4); } }; return k <= 0 ? x4.getAsDouble() + x5.getAsDouble() : B.getAsDouble(); } public static void main(String[] args) { System.out.println(A(10, () -> 1.0, () -> -1.0, () -> -1.0, () -> 1.0, () -> 0.0)); } }
Convert this Icon snippet to Python and keep its semantics consistent.
record mutable(value) procedure main(arglist) k := integer(arglist[1])|10 write("Man or Boy = ", A( k, 1, -1, -1, 1, 0 ) ) end procedure eval(ref) return if type(ref) == "co-expression" then @ref else ref end procedure A(k,x1,x2,x3,x4,x5) k := mutable(k) return if k.value <= 0 then eval(x4) + eval(x5) else B(k,x1,x2,x3,x4,x5) end procedure B(k,x1,x2,x3,x4,x5) k.value -:= 1 return A(k.value, create |B(k,x1,x2,x3,x4,x5),x1,x2,x3,x4) end
import sys sys.setrecursionlimit(1025) def a(in_k, x1, x2, x3, x4, x5): k = [in_k] def b(): k[0] -= 1 return a(k[0], b, x1, x2, x3, x4) return x4() + x5() if k[0] <= 0 else b() x = lambda i: lambda: i print(a(10, x(1), x(-1), x(-1), x(1), x(0)))
Change the following Icon code into Go without altering its purpose.
record mutable(value) procedure main(arglist) k := integer(arglist[1])|10 write("Man or Boy = ", A( k, 1, -1, -1, 1, 0 ) ) end procedure eval(ref) return if type(ref) == "co-expression" then @ref else ref end procedure A(k,x1,x2,x3,x4,x5) k := mutable(k) return if k.value <= 0 then eval(x4) + eval(x5) else B(k,x1,x2,x3,x4,x5) end procedure B(k,x1,x2,x3,x4,x5) k.value -:= 1 return A(k.value, create |B(k,x1,x2,x3,x4,x5),x1,x2,x3,x4) end
package main import "fmt" func a(k int, x1, x2, x3, x4, x5 func() int) int { var b func() int b = func() int { k-- return a(k, b, x1, x2, x3, x4) } if k <= 0 { return x4() + x5() } return b() } func main() { x := func(i int) func() int { return func() int { return i } } fmt.Println(a(10, x(1), x(-1), x(-1), x(1), x(0))) }
Convert this J block to C, preserving its control flow and logic.
A=:4 :0 L=.cocreate'' k__L=:x '`x1__L x2__L x3__L x4__L x5__L'=:y if.k__L<:0 do.a__L=:(x4__L + x5__L)f.'' else. L B '' end. (coerase L)]]]a__L ) B=:4 :0 L=.x k__L=:k__L-1 a__L=:k__L A L&B`(x1__L f.)`(x2__L f.)`(x3__L f.)`(x4__L f.) )
#include <stdio.h> #include <stdlib.h> typedef struct arg { int (*fn)(struct arg*); int *k; struct arg *x1, *x2, *x3, *x4, *x5; } ARG; int f_1 (ARG* _) { return -1; } int f0 (ARG* _) { return 0; } int f1 (ARG* _) { return 1; } int eval(ARG* a) { return a->fn(a); } #define MAKE_ARG(...) (&(ARG){__VA_ARGS__}) #define FUN(...) MAKE_ARG(B, &k, __VA_ARGS__) int A(ARG*); int B(ARG* a) { int k = *a->k -= 1; return A(FUN(a, a->x1, a->x2, a->x3, a->x4)); } int A(ARG* a) { return *a->k <= 0 ? eval(a->x4) + eval(a->x5) : B(a); } int main(int argc, char **argv) { int k = argc == 2 ? strtol(argv[1], 0, 0) : 10; printf("%d\n", A(FUN(MAKE_ARG(f1), MAKE_ARG(f_1), MAKE_ARG(f_1), MAKE_ARG(f1), MAKE_ARG(f0)))); return 0; }
Please provide an equivalent version of this J code in C#.
A=:4 :0 L=.cocreate'' k__L=:x '`x1__L x2__L x3__L x4__L x5__L'=:y if.k__L<:0 do.a__L=:(x4__L + x5__L)f.'' else. L B '' end. (coerase L)]]]a__L ) B=:4 :0 L=.x k__L=:k__L-1 a__L=:k__L A L&B`(x1__L f.)`(x2__L f.)`(x3__L f.)`(x4__L f.) )
using System; delegate T Func<T>(); class ManOrBoy { static void Main() { Console.WriteLine(A(10, C(1), C(-1), C(-1), C(1), C(0))); } static Func<int> C(int i) { return delegate { return i; }; } static int A(int k, Func<int> x1, Func<int> x2, Func<int> x3, Func<int> x4, Func<int> x5) { Func<int> b = null; b = delegate { k--; return A(k, b, x1, x2, x3, x4); }; return k <= 0 ? x4() + x5() : b(); } }
Rewrite this program in C++ while keeping its functionality equivalent to the J version.
A=:4 :0 L=.cocreate'' k__L=:x '`x1__L x2__L x3__L x4__L x5__L'=:y if.k__L<:0 do.a__L=:(x4__L + x5__L)f.'' else. L B '' end. (coerase L)]]]a__L ) B=:4 :0 L=.x k__L=:k__L-1 a__L=:k__L A L&B`(x1__L f.)`(x2__L f.)`(x3__L f.)`(x4__L f.) )
#include <iostream> #include <tr1/memory> using std::tr1::shared_ptr; using std::tr1::enable_shared_from_this; struct Arg { virtual int run() = 0; virtual ~Arg() { }; }; int A(int, shared_ptr<Arg>, shared_ptr<Arg>, shared_ptr<Arg>, shared_ptr<Arg>, shared_ptr<Arg>); class B : public Arg, public enable_shared_from_this<B> { private: int k; const shared_ptr<Arg> x1, x2, x3, x4; public: B(int _k, shared_ptr<Arg> _x1, shared_ptr<Arg> _x2, shared_ptr<Arg> _x3, shared_ptr<Arg> _x4) : k(_k), x1(_x1), x2(_x2), x3(_x3), x4(_x4) { } int run() { return A(--k, shared_from_this(), x1, x2, x3, x4); } }; class Const : public Arg { private: const int x; public: Const(int _x) : x(_x) { } int run () { return x; } }; int A(int k, shared_ptr<Arg> x1, shared_ptr<Arg> x2, shared_ptr<Arg> x3, shared_ptr<Arg> x4, shared_ptr<Arg> x5) { if (k <= 0) return x4->run() + x5->run(); else { shared_ptr<Arg> b(new B(k, x1, x2, x3, x4)); return b->run(); } } int main() { std::cout << A(10, shared_ptr<Arg>(new Const(1)), shared_ptr<Arg>(new Const(-1)), shared_ptr<Arg>(new Const(-1)), shared_ptr<Arg>(new Const(1)), shared_ptr<Arg>(new Const(0))) << std::endl; return 0; }
Change the programming language of this snippet from J to Java without modifying what it does.
A=:4 :0 L=.cocreate'' k__L=:x '`x1__L x2__L x3__L x4__L x5__L'=:y if.k__L<:0 do.a__L=:(x4__L + x5__L)f.'' else. L B '' end. (coerase L)]]]a__L ) B=:4 :0 L=.x k__L=:k__L-1 a__L=:k__L A L&B`(x1__L f.)`(x2__L f.)`(x3__L f.)`(x4__L f.) )
import java.util.function.DoubleSupplier; public class ManOrBoy { static double A(int k, DoubleSupplier x1, DoubleSupplier x2, DoubleSupplier x3, DoubleSupplier x4, DoubleSupplier x5) { DoubleSupplier B = new DoubleSupplier() { int m = k; public double getAsDouble() { return A(--m, this, x1, x2, x3, x4); } }; return k <= 0 ? x4.getAsDouble() + x5.getAsDouble() : B.getAsDouble(); } public static void main(String[] args) { System.out.println(A(10, () -> 1.0, () -> -1.0, () -> -1.0, () -> 1.0, () -> 0.0)); } }
Convert the following code from J to Python, ensuring the logic remains intact.
A=:4 :0 L=.cocreate'' k__L=:x '`x1__L x2__L x3__L x4__L x5__L'=:y if.k__L<:0 do.a__L=:(x4__L + x5__L)f.'' else. L B '' end. (coerase L)]]]a__L ) B=:4 :0 L=.x k__L=:k__L-1 a__L=:k__L A L&B`(x1__L f.)`(x2__L f.)`(x3__L f.)`(x4__L f.) )
import sys sys.setrecursionlimit(1025) def a(in_k, x1, x2, x3, x4, x5): k = [in_k] def b(): k[0] -= 1 return a(k[0], b, x1, x2, x3, x4) return x4() + x5() if k[0] <= 0 else b() x = lambda i: lambda: i print(a(10, x(1), x(-1), x(-1), x(1), x(0)))
Convert this J snippet to Go and keep its semantics consistent.
A=:4 :0 L=.cocreate'' k__L=:x '`x1__L x2__L x3__L x4__L x5__L'=:y if.k__L<:0 do.a__L=:(x4__L + x5__L)f.'' else. L B '' end. (coerase L)]]]a__L ) B=:4 :0 L=.x k__L=:k__L-1 a__L=:k__L A L&B`(x1__L f.)`(x2__L f.)`(x3__L f.)`(x4__L f.) )
package main import "fmt" func a(k int, x1, x2, x3, x4, x5 func() int) int { var b func() int b = func() int { k-- return a(k, b, x1, x2, x3, x4) } if k <= 0 { return x4() + x5() } return b() } func main() { x := func(i int) func() int { return func() int { return i } } fmt.Println(a(10, x(1), x(-1), x(-1), x(1), x(0))) }
Transform the following Julia implementation into C, maintaining the same output and logic.
function a(k, x1, x2, x3, x4, x5) b = ()-> a(k-=1, b, x1, x2, x3, x4); k <= 0 ? (x4() + x5()) : b(); end println(a(10, ()->1, ()->-1, ()->-1, ()->1, ()->0));
#include <stdio.h> #include <stdlib.h> typedef struct arg { int (*fn)(struct arg*); int *k; struct arg *x1, *x2, *x3, *x4, *x5; } ARG; int f_1 (ARG* _) { return -1; } int f0 (ARG* _) { return 0; } int f1 (ARG* _) { return 1; } int eval(ARG* a) { return a->fn(a); } #define MAKE_ARG(...) (&(ARG){__VA_ARGS__}) #define FUN(...) MAKE_ARG(B, &k, __VA_ARGS__) int A(ARG*); int B(ARG* a) { int k = *a->k -= 1; return A(FUN(a, a->x1, a->x2, a->x3, a->x4)); } int A(ARG* a) { return *a->k <= 0 ? eval(a->x4) + eval(a->x5) : B(a); } int main(int argc, char **argv) { int k = argc == 2 ? strtol(argv[1], 0, 0) : 10; printf("%d\n", A(FUN(MAKE_ARG(f1), MAKE_ARG(f_1), MAKE_ARG(f_1), MAKE_ARG(f1), MAKE_ARG(f0)))); return 0; }
Port the provided Julia code into C# while preserving the original functionality.
function a(k, x1, x2, x3, x4, x5) b = ()-> a(k-=1, b, x1, x2, x3, x4); k <= 0 ? (x4() + x5()) : b(); end println(a(10, ()->1, ()->-1, ()->-1, ()->1, ()->0));
using System; delegate T Func<T>(); class ManOrBoy { static void Main() { Console.WriteLine(A(10, C(1), C(-1), C(-1), C(1), C(0))); } static Func<int> C(int i) { return delegate { return i; }; } static int A(int k, Func<int> x1, Func<int> x2, Func<int> x3, Func<int> x4, Func<int> x5) { Func<int> b = null; b = delegate { k--; return A(k, b, x1, x2, x3, x4); }; return k <= 0 ? x4() + x5() : b(); } }
Convert the following code from Julia to C++, ensuring the logic remains intact.
function a(k, x1, x2, x3, x4, x5) b = ()-> a(k-=1, b, x1, x2, x3, x4); k <= 0 ? (x4() + x5()) : b(); end println(a(10, ()->1, ()->-1, ()->-1, ()->1, ()->0));
#include <iostream> #include <tr1/memory> using std::tr1::shared_ptr; using std::tr1::enable_shared_from_this; struct Arg { virtual int run() = 0; virtual ~Arg() { }; }; int A(int, shared_ptr<Arg>, shared_ptr<Arg>, shared_ptr<Arg>, shared_ptr<Arg>, shared_ptr<Arg>); class B : public Arg, public enable_shared_from_this<B> { private: int k; const shared_ptr<Arg> x1, x2, x3, x4; public: B(int _k, shared_ptr<Arg> _x1, shared_ptr<Arg> _x2, shared_ptr<Arg> _x3, shared_ptr<Arg> _x4) : k(_k), x1(_x1), x2(_x2), x3(_x3), x4(_x4) { } int run() { return A(--k, shared_from_this(), x1, x2, x3, x4); } }; class Const : public Arg { private: const int x; public: Const(int _x) : x(_x) { } int run () { return x; } }; int A(int k, shared_ptr<Arg> x1, shared_ptr<Arg> x2, shared_ptr<Arg> x3, shared_ptr<Arg> x4, shared_ptr<Arg> x5) { if (k <= 0) return x4->run() + x5->run(); else { shared_ptr<Arg> b(new B(k, x1, x2, x3, x4)); return b->run(); } } int main() { std::cout << A(10, shared_ptr<Arg>(new Const(1)), shared_ptr<Arg>(new Const(-1)), shared_ptr<Arg>(new Const(-1)), shared_ptr<Arg>(new Const(1)), shared_ptr<Arg>(new Const(0))) << std::endl; return 0; }
Can you help me rewrite this code in Java instead of Julia, keeping it the same logically?
function a(k, x1, x2, x3, x4, x5) b = ()-> a(k-=1, b, x1, x2, x3, x4); k <= 0 ? (x4() + x5()) : b(); end println(a(10, ()->1, ()->-1, ()->-1, ()->1, ()->0));
import java.util.function.DoubleSupplier; public class ManOrBoy { static double A(int k, DoubleSupplier x1, DoubleSupplier x2, DoubleSupplier x3, DoubleSupplier x4, DoubleSupplier x5) { DoubleSupplier B = new DoubleSupplier() { int m = k; public double getAsDouble() { return A(--m, this, x1, x2, x3, x4); } }; return k <= 0 ? x4.getAsDouble() + x5.getAsDouble() : B.getAsDouble(); } public static void main(String[] args) { System.out.println(A(10, () -> 1.0, () -> -1.0, () -> -1.0, () -> 1.0, () -> 0.0)); } }
Write a version of this Julia function in Python with identical behavior.
function a(k, x1, x2, x3, x4, x5) b = ()-> a(k-=1, b, x1, x2, x3, x4); k <= 0 ? (x4() + x5()) : b(); end println(a(10, ()->1, ()->-1, ()->-1, ()->1, ()->0));
import sys sys.setrecursionlimit(1025) def a(in_k, x1, x2, x3, x4, x5): k = [in_k] def b(): k[0] -= 1 return a(k[0], b, x1, x2, x3, x4) return x4() + x5() if k[0] <= 0 else b() x = lambda i: lambda: i print(a(10, x(1), x(-1), x(-1), x(1), x(0)))
Translate the given Julia code snippet into Go without altering its behavior.
function a(k, x1, x2, x3, x4, x5) b = ()-> a(k-=1, b, x1, x2, x3, x4); k <= 0 ? (x4() + x5()) : b(); end println(a(10, ()->1, ()->-1, ()->-1, ()->1, ()->0));
package main import "fmt" func a(k int, x1, x2, x3, x4, x5 func() int) int { var b func() int b = func() int { k-- return a(k, b, x1, x2, x3, x4) } if k <= 0 { return x4() + x5() } return b() } func main() { x := func(i int) func() int { return func() int { return i } } fmt.Println(a(10, x(1), x(-1), x(-1), x(1), x(0))) }
Translate this program into C but keep the logic exactly as in Lua.
function a(k,x1,x2,x3,x4,x5) local function b() k = k - 1 return a(k,b,x1,x2,x3,x4) end if k <= 0 then return x4() + x5() else return b() end end function K(n) return function() return n end end print(a(10, K(1), K(-1), K(-1), K(1), K(0)))
#include <stdio.h> #include <stdlib.h> typedef struct arg { int (*fn)(struct arg*); int *k; struct arg *x1, *x2, *x3, *x4, *x5; } ARG; int f_1 (ARG* _) { return -1; } int f0 (ARG* _) { return 0; } int f1 (ARG* _) { return 1; } int eval(ARG* a) { return a->fn(a); } #define MAKE_ARG(...) (&(ARG){__VA_ARGS__}) #define FUN(...) MAKE_ARG(B, &k, __VA_ARGS__) int A(ARG*); int B(ARG* a) { int k = *a->k -= 1; return A(FUN(a, a->x1, a->x2, a->x3, a->x4)); } int A(ARG* a) { return *a->k <= 0 ? eval(a->x4) + eval(a->x5) : B(a); } int main(int argc, char **argv) { int k = argc == 2 ? strtol(argv[1], 0, 0) : 10; printf("%d\n", A(FUN(MAKE_ARG(f1), MAKE_ARG(f_1), MAKE_ARG(f_1), MAKE_ARG(f1), MAKE_ARG(f0)))); return 0; }
Can you help me rewrite this code in C# instead of Lua, keeping it the same logically?
function a(k,x1,x2,x3,x4,x5) local function b() k = k - 1 return a(k,b,x1,x2,x3,x4) end if k <= 0 then return x4() + x5() else return b() end end function K(n) return function() return n end end print(a(10, K(1), K(-1), K(-1), K(1), K(0)))
using System; delegate T Func<T>(); class ManOrBoy { static void Main() { Console.WriteLine(A(10, C(1), C(-1), C(-1), C(1), C(0))); } static Func<int> C(int i) { return delegate { return i; }; } static int A(int k, Func<int> x1, Func<int> x2, Func<int> x3, Func<int> x4, Func<int> x5) { Func<int> b = null; b = delegate { k--; return A(k, b, x1, x2, x3, x4); }; return k <= 0 ? x4() + x5() : b(); } }
Write a version of this Lua function in C++ with identical behavior.
function a(k,x1,x2,x3,x4,x5) local function b() k = k - 1 return a(k,b,x1,x2,x3,x4) end if k <= 0 then return x4() + x5() else return b() end end function K(n) return function() return n end end print(a(10, K(1), K(-1), K(-1), K(1), K(0)))
#include <iostream> #include <tr1/memory> using std::tr1::shared_ptr; using std::tr1::enable_shared_from_this; struct Arg { virtual int run() = 0; virtual ~Arg() { }; }; int A(int, shared_ptr<Arg>, shared_ptr<Arg>, shared_ptr<Arg>, shared_ptr<Arg>, shared_ptr<Arg>); class B : public Arg, public enable_shared_from_this<B> { private: int k; const shared_ptr<Arg> x1, x2, x3, x4; public: B(int _k, shared_ptr<Arg> _x1, shared_ptr<Arg> _x2, shared_ptr<Arg> _x3, shared_ptr<Arg> _x4) : k(_k), x1(_x1), x2(_x2), x3(_x3), x4(_x4) { } int run() { return A(--k, shared_from_this(), x1, x2, x3, x4); } }; class Const : public Arg { private: const int x; public: Const(int _x) : x(_x) { } int run () { return x; } }; int A(int k, shared_ptr<Arg> x1, shared_ptr<Arg> x2, shared_ptr<Arg> x3, shared_ptr<Arg> x4, shared_ptr<Arg> x5) { if (k <= 0) return x4->run() + x5->run(); else { shared_ptr<Arg> b(new B(k, x1, x2, x3, x4)); return b->run(); } } int main() { std::cout << A(10, shared_ptr<Arg>(new Const(1)), shared_ptr<Arg>(new Const(-1)), shared_ptr<Arg>(new Const(-1)), shared_ptr<Arg>(new Const(1)), shared_ptr<Arg>(new Const(0))) << std::endl; return 0; }
Produce a language-to-language conversion: from Lua to Java, same semantics.
function a(k,x1,x2,x3,x4,x5) local function b() k = k - 1 return a(k,b,x1,x2,x3,x4) end if k <= 0 then return x4() + x5() else return b() end end function K(n) return function() return n end end print(a(10, K(1), K(-1), K(-1), K(1), K(0)))
import java.util.function.DoubleSupplier; public class ManOrBoy { static double A(int k, DoubleSupplier x1, DoubleSupplier x2, DoubleSupplier x3, DoubleSupplier x4, DoubleSupplier x5) { DoubleSupplier B = new DoubleSupplier() { int m = k; public double getAsDouble() { return A(--m, this, x1, x2, x3, x4); } }; return k <= 0 ? x4.getAsDouble() + x5.getAsDouble() : B.getAsDouble(); } public static void main(String[] args) { System.out.println(A(10, () -> 1.0, () -> -1.0, () -> -1.0, () -> 1.0, () -> 0.0)); } }
Translate the given Lua code snippet into Python without altering its behavior.
function a(k,x1,x2,x3,x4,x5) local function b() k = k - 1 return a(k,b,x1,x2,x3,x4) end if k <= 0 then return x4() + x5() else return b() end end function K(n) return function() return n end end print(a(10, K(1), K(-1), K(-1), K(1), K(0)))
import sys sys.setrecursionlimit(1025) def a(in_k, x1, x2, x3, x4, x5): k = [in_k] def b(): k[0] -= 1 return a(k[0], b, x1, x2, x3, x4) return x4() + x5() if k[0] <= 0 else b() x = lambda i: lambda: i print(a(10, x(1), x(-1), x(-1), x(1), x(0)))
Ensure the translated Go code behaves exactly like the original Lua snippet.
function a(k,x1,x2,x3,x4,x5) local function b() k = k - 1 return a(k,b,x1,x2,x3,x4) end if k <= 0 then return x4() + x5() else return b() end end function K(n) return function() return n end end print(a(10, K(1), K(-1), K(-1), K(1), K(0)))
package main import "fmt" func a(k int, x1, x2, x3, x4, x5 func() int) int { var b func() int b = func() int { k-- return a(k, b, x1, x2, x3, x4) } if k <= 0 { return x4() + x5() } return b() } func main() { x := func(i int) func() int { return func() int { return i } } fmt.Println(a(10, x(1), x(-1), x(-1), x(1), x(0))) }
Generate an equivalent C version of this Mathematica code.
$RecursionLimit = 1665; a[k0_, x1_, x2_, x3_, x4_, x5_] := Module[{k, b }, k = k0; b = (k--; a[k, b, x1, x2, x3, x4]) &; If[k <= 0, x4[] + x5[], b[]]] a[10, 1 &, -1 &, -1 &, 1 &, 0 &]
#include <stdio.h> #include <stdlib.h> typedef struct arg { int (*fn)(struct arg*); int *k; struct arg *x1, *x2, *x3, *x4, *x5; } ARG; int f_1 (ARG* _) { return -1; } int f0 (ARG* _) { return 0; } int f1 (ARG* _) { return 1; } int eval(ARG* a) { return a->fn(a); } #define MAKE_ARG(...) (&(ARG){__VA_ARGS__}) #define FUN(...) MAKE_ARG(B, &k, __VA_ARGS__) int A(ARG*); int B(ARG* a) { int k = *a->k -= 1; return A(FUN(a, a->x1, a->x2, a->x3, a->x4)); } int A(ARG* a) { return *a->k <= 0 ? eval(a->x4) + eval(a->x5) : B(a); } int main(int argc, char **argv) { int k = argc == 2 ? strtol(argv[1], 0, 0) : 10; printf("%d\n", A(FUN(MAKE_ARG(f1), MAKE_ARG(f_1), MAKE_ARG(f_1), MAKE_ARG(f1), MAKE_ARG(f0)))); return 0; }
Transform the following Mathematica implementation into C#, maintaining the same output and logic.
$RecursionLimit = 1665; a[k0_, x1_, x2_, x3_, x4_, x5_] := Module[{k, b }, k = k0; b = (k--; a[k, b, x1, x2, x3, x4]) &; If[k <= 0, x4[] + x5[], b[]]] a[10, 1 &, -1 &, -1 &, 1 &, 0 &]
using System; delegate T Func<T>(); class ManOrBoy { static void Main() { Console.WriteLine(A(10, C(1), C(-1), C(-1), C(1), C(0))); } static Func<int> C(int i) { return delegate { return i; }; } static int A(int k, Func<int> x1, Func<int> x2, Func<int> x3, Func<int> x4, Func<int> x5) { Func<int> b = null; b = delegate { k--; return A(k, b, x1, x2, x3, x4); }; return k <= 0 ? x4() + x5() : b(); } }
Write the same code in C++ as shown below in Mathematica.
$RecursionLimit = 1665; a[k0_, x1_, x2_, x3_, x4_, x5_] := Module[{k, b }, k = k0; b = (k--; a[k, b, x1, x2, x3, x4]) &; If[k <= 0, x4[] + x5[], b[]]] a[10, 1 &, -1 &, -1 &, 1 &, 0 &]
#include <iostream> #include <tr1/memory> using std::tr1::shared_ptr; using std::tr1::enable_shared_from_this; struct Arg { virtual int run() = 0; virtual ~Arg() { }; }; int A(int, shared_ptr<Arg>, shared_ptr<Arg>, shared_ptr<Arg>, shared_ptr<Arg>, shared_ptr<Arg>); class B : public Arg, public enable_shared_from_this<B> { private: int k; const shared_ptr<Arg> x1, x2, x3, x4; public: B(int _k, shared_ptr<Arg> _x1, shared_ptr<Arg> _x2, shared_ptr<Arg> _x3, shared_ptr<Arg> _x4) : k(_k), x1(_x1), x2(_x2), x3(_x3), x4(_x4) { } int run() { return A(--k, shared_from_this(), x1, x2, x3, x4); } }; class Const : public Arg { private: const int x; public: Const(int _x) : x(_x) { } int run () { return x; } }; int A(int k, shared_ptr<Arg> x1, shared_ptr<Arg> x2, shared_ptr<Arg> x3, shared_ptr<Arg> x4, shared_ptr<Arg> x5) { if (k <= 0) return x4->run() + x5->run(); else { shared_ptr<Arg> b(new B(k, x1, x2, x3, x4)); return b->run(); } } int main() { std::cout << A(10, shared_ptr<Arg>(new Const(1)), shared_ptr<Arg>(new Const(-1)), shared_ptr<Arg>(new Const(-1)), shared_ptr<Arg>(new Const(1)), shared_ptr<Arg>(new Const(0))) << std::endl; return 0; }
Produce a functionally identical Java code for the snippet given in Mathematica.
$RecursionLimit = 1665; a[k0_, x1_, x2_, x3_, x4_, x5_] := Module[{k, b }, k = k0; b = (k--; a[k, b, x1, x2, x3, x4]) &; If[k <= 0, x4[] + x5[], b[]]] a[10, 1 &, -1 &, -1 &, 1 &, 0 &]
import java.util.function.DoubleSupplier; public class ManOrBoy { static double A(int k, DoubleSupplier x1, DoubleSupplier x2, DoubleSupplier x3, DoubleSupplier x4, DoubleSupplier x5) { DoubleSupplier B = new DoubleSupplier() { int m = k; public double getAsDouble() { return A(--m, this, x1, x2, x3, x4); } }; return k <= 0 ? x4.getAsDouble() + x5.getAsDouble() : B.getAsDouble(); } public static void main(String[] args) { System.out.println(A(10, () -> 1.0, () -> -1.0, () -> -1.0, () -> 1.0, () -> 0.0)); } }
Translate this program into Python but keep the logic exactly as in Mathematica.
$RecursionLimit = 1665; a[k0_, x1_, x2_, x3_, x4_, x5_] := Module[{k, b }, k = k0; b = (k--; a[k, b, x1, x2, x3, x4]) &; If[k <= 0, x4[] + x5[], b[]]] a[10, 1 &, -1 &, -1 &, 1 &, 0 &]
import sys sys.setrecursionlimit(1025) def a(in_k, x1, x2, x3, x4, x5): k = [in_k] def b(): k[0] -= 1 return a(k[0], b, x1, x2, x3, x4) return x4() + x5() if k[0] <= 0 else b() x = lambda i: lambda: i print(a(10, x(1), x(-1), x(-1), x(1), x(0)))
Translate the given Mathematica code snippet into Go without altering its behavior.
$RecursionLimit = 1665; a[k0_, x1_, x2_, x3_, x4_, x5_] := Module[{k, b }, k = k0; b = (k--; a[k, b, x1, x2, x3, x4]) &; If[k <= 0, x4[] + x5[], b[]]] a[10, 1 &, -1 &, -1 &, 1 &, 0 &]
package main import "fmt" func a(k int, x1, x2, x3, x4, x5 func() int) int { var b func() int b = func() int { k-- return a(k, b, x1, x2, x3, x4) } if k <= 0 { return x4() + x5() } return b() } func main() { x := func(i int) func() int { return func() int { return i } } fmt.Println(a(10, x(1), x(-1), x(-1), x(1), x(0))) }
Change the programming language of this snippet from Nim to C without modifying what it does.
import sugar proc a(k: int; x1, x2, x3, x4, x5: proc(): int): int = var k = k proc b(): int = dec k a(k, b, x1, x2, x3, x4) if k <= 0: x4() + x5() else: b() echo a(10, () => 1, () => -1, () => -1, () => 1, () => 0)
#include <stdio.h> #include <stdlib.h> typedef struct arg { int (*fn)(struct arg*); int *k; struct arg *x1, *x2, *x3, *x4, *x5; } ARG; int f_1 (ARG* _) { return -1; } int f0 (ARG* _) { return 0; } int f1 (ARG* _) { return 1; } int eval(ARG* a) { return a->fn(a); } #define MAKE_ARG(...) (&(ARG){__VA_ARGS__}) #define FUN(...) MAKE_ARG(B, &k, __VA_ARGS__) int A(ARG*); int B(ARG* a) { int k = *a->k -= 1; return A(FUN(a, a->x1, a->x2, a->x3, a->x4)); } int A(ARG* a) { return *a->k <= 0 ? eval(a->x4) + eval(a->x5) : B(a); } int main(int argc, char **argv) { int k = argc == 2 ? strtol(argv[1], 0, 0) : 10; printf("%d\n", A(FUN(MAKE_ARG(f1), MAKE_ARG(f_1), MAKE_ARG(f_1), MAKE_ARG(f1), MAKE_ARG(f0)))); return 0; }
Please provide an equivalent version of this Nim code in C#.
import sugar proc a(k: int; x1, x2, x3, x4, x5: proc(): int): int = var k = k proc b(): int = dec k a(k, b, x1, x2, x3, x4) if k <= 0: x4() + x5() else: b() echo a(10, () => 1, () => -1, () => -1, () => 1, () => 0)
using System; delegate T Func<T>(); class ManOrBoy { static void Main() { Console.WriteLine(A(10, C(1), C(-1), C(-1), C(1), C(0))); } static Func<int> C(int i) { return delegate { return i; }; } static int A(int k, Func<int> x1, Func<int> x2, Func<int> x3, Func<int> x4, Func<int> x5) { Func<int> b = null; b = delegate { k--; return A(k, b, x1, x2, x3, x4); }; return k <= 0 ? x4() + x5() : b(); } }
Ensure the translated C++ code behaves exactly like the original Nim snippet.
import sugar proc a(k: int; x1, x2, x3, x4, x5: proc(): int): int = var k = k proc b(): int = dec k a(k, b, x1, x2, x3, x4) if k <= 0: x4() + x5() else: b() echo a(10, () => 1, () => -1, () => -1, () => 1, () => 0)
#include <iostream> #include <tr1/memory> using std::tr1::shared_ptr; using std::tr1::enable_shared_from_this; struct Arg { virtual int run() = 0; virtual ~Arg() { }; }; int A(int, shared_ptr<Arg>, shared_ptr<Arg>, shared_ptr<Arg>, shared_ptr<Arg>, shared_ptr<Arg>); class B : public Arg, public enable_shared_from_this<B> { private: int k; const shared_ptr<Arg> x1, x2, x3, x4; public: B(int _k, shared_ptr<Arg> _x1, shared_ptr<Arg> _x2, shared_ptr<Arg> _x3, shared_ptr<Arg> _x4) : k(_k), x1(_x1), x2(_x2), x3(_x3), x4(_x4) { } int run() { return A(--k, shared_from_this(), x1, x2, x3, x4); } }; class Const : public Arg { private: const int x; public: Const(int _x) : x(_x) { } int run () { return x; } }; int A(int k, shared_ptr<Arg> x1, shared_ptr<Arg> x2, shared_ptr<Arg> x3, shared_ptr<Arg> x4, shared_ptr<Arg> x5) { if (k <= 0) return x4->run() + x5->run(); else { shared_ptr<Arg> b(new B(k, x1, x2, x3, x4)); return b->run(); } } int main() { std::cout << A(10, shared_ptr<Arg>(new Const(1)), shared_ptr<Arg>(new Const(-1)), shared_ptr<Arg>(new Const(-1)), shared_ptr<Arg>(new Const(1)), shared_ptr<Arg>(new Const(0))) << std::endl; return 0; }
Preserve the algorithm and functionality while converting the code from Nim to Java.
import sugar proc a(k: int; x1, x2, x3, x4, x5: proc(): int): int = var k = k proc b(): int = dec k a(k, b, x1, x2, x3, x4) if k <= 0: x4() + x5() else: b() echo a(10, () => 1, () => -1, () => -1, () => 1, () => 0)
import java.util.function.DoubleSupplier; public class ManOrBoy { static double A(int k, DoubleSupplier x1, DoubleSupplier x2, DoubleSupplier x3, DoubleSupplier x4, DoubleSupplier x5) { DoubleSupplier B = new DoubleSupplier() { int m = k; public double getAsDouble() { return A(--m, this, x1, x2, x3, x4); } }; return k <= 0 ? x4.getAsDouble() + x5.getAsDouble() : B.getAsDouble(); } public static void main(String[] args) { System.out.println(A(10, () -> 1.0, () -> -1.0, () -> -1.0, () -> 1.0, () -> 0.0)); } }
Generate a Python translation of this Nim snippet without changing its computational steps.
import sugar proc a(k: int; x1, x2, x3, x4, x5: proc(): int): int = var k = k proc b(): int = dec k a(k, b, x1, x2, x3, x4) if k <= 0: x4() + x5() else: b() echo a(10, () => 1, () => -1, () => -1, () => 1, () => 0)
import sys sys.setrecursionlimit(1025) def a(in_k, x1, x2, x3, x4, x5): k = [in_k] def b(): k[0] -= 1 return a(k[0], b, x1, x2, x3, x4) return x4() + x5() if k[0] <= 0 else b() x = lambda i: lambda: i print(a(10, x(1), x(-1), x(-1), x(1), x(0)))
Rewrite the snippet below in Go so it works the same as the original Nim code.
import sugar proc a(k: int; x1, x2, x3, x4, x5: proc(): int): int = var k = k proc b(): int = dec k a(k, b, x1, x2, x3, x4) if k <= 0: x4() + x5() else: b() echo a(10, () => 1, () => -1, () => -1, () => 1, () => 0)
package main import "fmt" func a(k int, x1, x2, x3, x4, x5 func() int) int { var b func() int b = func() int { k-- return a(k, b, x1, x2, x3, x4) } if k <= 0 { return x4() + x5() } return b() } func main() { x := func(i int) func() int { return func() int { return i } } fmt.Println(a(10, x(1), x(-1), x(-1), x(1), x(0))) }
Produce a functionally identical C code for the snippet given in OCaml.
let rec a k x1 x2 x3 x4 x5 = if k <= 0 then x4 () + x5 () else let m = ref k in let rec b () = decr m; a !m b x1 x2 x3 x4 in b () let () = Printf.printf "%d\n" (a 10 (fun () -> 1) (fun () -> -1) (fun () -> -1) (fun () -> 1) (fun () -> 0))
#include <stdio.h> #include <stdlib.h> typedef struct arg { int (*fn)(struct arg*); int *k; struct arg *x1, *x2, *x3, *x4, *x5; } ARG; int f_1 (ARG* _) { return -1; } int f0 (ARG* _) { return 0; } int f1 (ARG* _) { return 1; } int eval(ARG* a) { return a->fn(a); } #define MAKE_ARG(...) (&(ARG){__VA_ARGS__}) #define FUN(...) MAKE_ARG(B, &k, __VA_ARGS__) int A(ARG*); int B(ARG* a) { int k = *a->k -= 1; return A(FUN(a, a->x1, a->x2, a->x3, a->x4)); } int A(ARG* a) { return *a->k <= 0 ? eval(a->x4) + eval(a->x5) : B(a); } int main(int argc, char **argv) { int k = argc == 2 ? strtol(argv[1], 0, 0) : 10; printf("%d\n", A(FUN(MAKE_ARG(f1), MAKE_ARG(f_1), MAKE_ARG(f_1), MAKE_ARG(f1), MAKE_ARG(f0)))); return 0; }
Change the following OCaml code into C# without altering its purpose.
let rec a k x1 x2 x3 x4 x5 = if k <= 0 then x4 () + x5 () else let m = ref k in let rec b () = decr m; a !m b x1 x2 x3 x4 in b () let () = Printf.printf "%d\n" (a 10 (fun () -> 1) (fun () -> -1) (fun () -> -1) (fun () -> 1) (fun () -> 0))
using System; delegate T Func<T>(); class ManOrBoy { static void Main() { Console.WriteLine(A(10, C(1), C(-1), C(-1), C(1), C(0))); } static Func<int> C(int i) { return delegate { return i; }; } static int A(int k, Func<int> x1, Func<int> x2, Func<int> x3, Func<int> x4, Func<int> x5) { Func<int> b = null; b = delegate { k--; return A(k, b, x1, x2, x3, x4); }; return k <= 0 ? x4() + x5() : b(); } }
Translate the given OCaml code snippet into C++ without altering its behavior.
let rec a k x1 x2 x3 x4 x5 = if k <= 0 then x4 () + x5 () else let m = ref k in let rec b () = decr m; a !m b x1 x2 x3 x4 in b () let () = Printf.printf "%d\n" (a 10 (fun () -> 1) (fun () -> -1) (fun () -> -1) (fun () -> 1) (fun () -> 0))
#include <iostream> #include <tr1/memory> using std::tr1::shared_ptr; using std::tr1::enable_shared_from_this; struct Arg { virtual int run() = 0; virtual ~Arg() { }; }; int A(int, shared_ptr<Arg>, shared_ptr<Arg>, shared_ptr<Arg>, shared_ptr<Arg>, shared_ptr<Arg>); class B : public Arg, public enable_shared_from_this<B> { private: int k; const shared_ptr<Arg> x1, x2, x3, x4; public: B(int _k, shared_ptr<Arg> _x1, shared_ptr<Arg> _x2, shared_ptr<Arg> _x3, shared_ptr<Arg> _x4) : k(_k), x1(_x1), x2(_x2), x3(_x3), x4(_x4) { } int run() { return A(--k, shared_from_this(), x1, x2, x3, x4); } }; class Const : public Arg { private: const int x; public: Const(int _x) : x(_x) { } int run () { return x; } }; int A(int k, shared_ptr<Arg> x1, shared_ptr<Arg> x2, shared_ptr<Arg> x3, shared_ptr<Arg> x4, shared_ptr<Arg> x5) { if (k <= 0) return x4->run() + x5->run(); else { shared_ptr<Arg> b(new B(k, x1, x2, x3, x4)); return b->run(); } } int main() { std::cout << A(10, shared_ptr<Arg>(new Const(1)), shared_ptr<Arg>(new Const(-1)), shared_ptr<Arg>(new Const(-1)), shared_ptr<Arg>(new Const(1)), shared_ptr<Arg>(new Const(0))) << std::endl; return 0; }
Ensure the translated Java code behaves exactly like the original OCaml snippet.
let rec a k x1 x2 x3 x4 x5 = if k <= 0 then x4 () + x5 () else let m = ref k in let rec b () = decr m; a !m b x1 x2 x3 x4 in b () let () = Printf.printf "%d\n" (a 10 (fun () -> 1) (fun () -> -1) (fun () -> -1) (fun () -> 1) (fun () -> 0))
import java.util.function.DoubleSupplier; public class ManOrBoy { static double A(int k, DoubleSupplier x1, DoubleSupplier x2, DoubleSupplier x3, DoubleSupplier x4, DoubleSupplier x5) { DoubleSupplier B = new DoubleSupplier() { int m = k; public double getAsDouble() { return A(--m, this, x1, x2, x3, x4); } }; return k <= 0 ? x4.getAsDouble() + x5.getAsDouble() : B.getAsDouble(); } public static void main(String[] args) { System.out.println(A(10, () -> 1.0, () -> -1.0, () -> -1.0, () -> 1.0, () -> 0.0)); } }
Can you help me rewrite this code in Python instead of OCaml, keeping it the same logically?
let rec a k x1 x2 x3 x4 x5 = if k <= 0 then x4 () + x5 () else let m = ref k in let rec b () = decr m; a !m b x1 x2 x3 x4 in b () let () = Printf.printf "%d\n" (a 10 (fun () -> 1) (fun () -> -1) (fun () -> -1) (fun () -> 1) (fun () -> 0))
import sys sys.setrecursionlimit(1025) def a(in_k, x1, x2, x3, x4, x5): k = [in_k] def b(): k[0] -= 1 return a(k[0], b, x1, x2, x3, x4) return x4() + x5() if k[0] <= 0 else b() x = lambda i: lambda: i print(a(10, x(1), x(-1), x(-1), x(1), x(0)))
Transform the following OCaml implementation into Go, maintaining the same output and logic.
let rec a k x1 x2 x3 x4 x5 = if k <= 0 then x4 () + x5 () else let m = ref k in let rec b () = decr m; a !m b x1 x2 x3 x4 in b () let () = Printf.printf "%d\n" (a 10 (fun () -> 1) (fun () -> -1) (fun () -> -1) (fun () -> 1) (fun () -> 0))
package main import "fmt" func a(k int, x1, x2, x3, x4, x5 func() int) int { var b func() int b = func() int { k-- return a(k, b, x1, x2, x3, x4) } if k <= 0 { return x4() + x5() } return b() } func main() { x := func(i int) func() int { return func() int { return i } } fmt.Println(a(10, x(1), x(-1), x(-1), x(1), x(0))) }
Translate this program into C but keep the logic exactly as in Pascal.
program manorboy(output); function zero: integer; begin zero := 0 end; function one: integer; begin one := 1 end; function negone: integer; begin negone := -1 end; function A( k: integer; function x1: integer; function x2: integer; function x3: integer; function x4: integer; function x5: integer ): integer; function B: integer; begin k := k - 1; B := A(k, B, x1, x2, x3, x4) end; begin if k <= 0 then A := x4 + x5 else A := B end; begin writeln(A(10, one, negone, negone, one, zero)) end.
#include <stdio.h> #include <stdlib.h> typedef struct arg { int (*fn)(struct arg*); int *k; struct arg *x1, *x2, *x3, *x4, *x5; } ARG; int f_1 (ARG* _) { return -1; } int f0 (ARG* _) { return 0; } int f1 (ARG* _) { return 1; } int eval(ARG* a) { return a->fn(a); } #define MAKE_ARG(...) (&(ARG){__VA_ARGS__}) #define FUN(...) MAKE_ARG(B, &k, __VA_ARGS__) int A(ARG*); int B(ARG* a) { int k = *a->k -= 1; return A(FUN(a, a->x1, a->x2, a->x3, a->x4)); } int A(ARG* a) { return *a->k <= 0 ? eval(a->x4) + eval(a->x5) : B(a); } int main(int argc, char **argv) { int k = argc == 2 ? strtol(argv[1], 0, 0) : 10; printf("%d\n", A(FUN(MAKE_ARG(f1), MAKE_ARG(f_1), MAKE_ARG(f_1), MAKE_ARG(f1), MAKE_ARG(f0)))); return 0; }
Translate the given Pascal code snippet into C# without altering its behavior.
program manorboy(output); function zero: integer; begin zero := 0 end; function one: integer; begin one := 1 end; function negone: integer; begin negone := -1 end; function A( k: integer; function x1: integer; function x2: integer; function x3: integer; function x4: integer; function x5: integer ): integer; function B: integer; begin k := k - 1; B := A(k, B, x1, x2, x3, x4) end; begin if k <= 0 then A := x4 + x5 else A := B end; begin writeln(A(10, one, negone, negone, one, zero)) end.
using System; delegate T Func<T>(); class ManOrBoy { static void Main() { Console.WriteLine(A(10, C(1), C(-1), C(-1), C(1), C(0))); } static Func<int> C(int i) { return delegate { return i; }; } static int A(int k, Func<int> x1, Func<int> x2, Func<int> x3, Func<int> x4, Func<int> x5) { Func<int> b = null; b = delegate { k--; return A(k, b, x1, x2, x3, x4); }; return k <= 0 ? x4() + x5() : b(); } }
Rewrite this program in C++ while keeping its functionality equivalent to the Pascal version.
program manorboy(output); function zero: integer; begin zero := 0 end; function one: integer; begin one := 1 end; function negone: integer; begin negone := -1 end; function A( k: integer; function x1: integer; function x2: integer; function x3: integer; function x4: integer; function x5: integer ): integer; function B: integer; begin k := k - 1; B := A(k, B, x1, x2, x3, x4) end; begin if k <= 0 then A := x4 + x5 else A := B end; begin writeln(A(10, one, negone, negone, one, zero)) end.
#include <iostream> #include <tr1/memory> using std::tr1::shared_ptr; using std::tr1::enable_shared_from_this; struct Arg { virtual int run() = 0; virtual ~Arg() { }; }; int A(int, shared_ptr<Arg>, shared_ptr<Arg>, shared_ptr<Arg>, shared_ptr<Arg>, shared_ptr<Arg>); class B : public Arg, public enable_shared_from_this<B> { private: int k; const shared_ptr<Arg> x1, x2, x3, x4; public: B(int _k, shared_ptr<Arg> _x1, shared_ptr<Arg> _x2, shared_ptr<Arg> _x3, shared_ptr<Arg> _x4) : k(_k), x1(_x1), x2(_x2), x3(_x3), x4(_x4) { } int run() { return A(--k, shared_from_this(), x1, x2, x3, x4); } }; class Const : public Arg { private: const int x; public: Const(int _x) : x(_x) { } int run () { return x; } }; int A(int k, shared_ptr<Arg> x1, shared_ptr<Arg> x2, shared_ptr<Arg> x3, shared_ptr<Arg> x4, shared_ptr<Arg> x5) { if (k <= 0) return x4->run() + x5->run(); else { shared_ptr<Arg> b(new B(k, x1, x2, x3, x4)); return b->run(); } } int main() { std::cout << A(10, shared_ptr<Arg>(new Const(1)), shared_ptr<Arg>(new Const(-1)), shared_ptr<Arg>(new Const(-1)), shared_ptr<Arg>(new Const(1)), shared_ptr<Arg>(new Const(0))) << std::endl; return 0; }
Port the following code from Pascal to Java with equivalent syntax and logic.
program manorboy(output); function zero: integer; begin zero := 0 end; function one: integer; begin one := 1 end; function negone: integer; begin negone := -1 end; function A( k: integer; function x1: integer; function x2: integer; function x3: integer; function x4: integer; function x5: integer ): integer; function B: integer; begin k := k - 1; B := A(k, B, x1, x2, x3, x4) end; begin if k <= 0 then A := x4 + x5 else A := B end; begin writeln(A(10, one, negone, negone, one, zero)) end.
import java.util.function.DoubleSupplier; public class ManOrBoy { static double A(int k, DoubleSupplier x1, DoubleSupplier x2, DoubleSupplier x3, DoubleSupplier x4, DoubleSupplier x5) { DoubleSupplier B = new DoubleSupplier() { int m = k; public double getAsDouble() { return A(--m, this, x1, x2, x3, x4); } }; return k <= 0 ? x4.getAsDouble() + x5.getAsDouble() : B.getAsDouble(); } public static void main(String[] args) { System.out.println(A(10, () -> 1.0, () -> -1.0, () -> -1.0, () -> 1.0, () -> 0.0)); } }
Preserve the algorithm and functionality while converting the code from Pascal to Python.
program manorboy(output); function zero: integer; begin zero := 0 end; function one: integer; begin one := 1 end; function negone: integer; begin negone := -1 end; function A( k: integer; function x1: integer; function x2: integer; function x3: integer; function x4: integer; function x5: integer ): integer; function B: integer; begin k := k - 1; B := A(k, B, x1, x2, x3, x4) end; begin if k <= 0 then A := x4 + x5 else A := B end; begin writeln(A(10, one, negone, negone, one, zero)) end.
import sys sys.setrecursionlimit(1025) def a(in_k, x1, x2, x3, x4, x5): k = [in_k] def b(): k[0] -= 1 return a(k[0], b, x1, x2, x3, x4) return x4() + x5() if k[0] <= 0 else b() x = lambda i: lambda: i print(a(10, x(1), x(-1), x(-1), x(1), x(0)))
Write the same code in Go as shown below in Pascal.
program manorboy(output); function zero: integer; begin zero := 0 end; function one: integer; begin one := 1 end; function negone: integer; begin negone := -1 end; function A( k: integer; function x1: integer; function x2: integer; function x3: integer; function x4: integer; function x5: integer ): integer; function B: integer; begin k := k - 1; B := A(k, B, x1, x2, x3, x4) end; begin if k <= 0 then A := x4 + x5 else A := B end; begin writeln(A(10, one, negone, negone, one, zero)) end.
package main import "fmt" func a(k int, x1, x2, x3, x4, x5 func() int) int { var b func() int b = func() int { k-- return a(k, b, x1, x2, x3, x4) } if k <= 0 { return x4() + x5() } return b() } func main() { x := func(i int) func() int { return func() int { return i } } fmt.Println(a(10, x(1), x(-1), x(-1), x(1), x(0))) }
Produce a functionally identical C code for the snippet given in Perl.
sub A { my ($k, $x1, $x2, $x3, $x4, $x5) = @_; my($B); $B = sub { A(--$k, $B, $x1, $x2, $x3, $x4) }; $k <= 0 ? &$x4 + &$x5 : &$B; } print A(10, sub{1}, sub {-1}, sub{-1}, sub{1}, sub{0} ), "\n";
#include <stdio.h> #include <stdlib.h> typedef struct arg { int (*fn)(struct arg*); int *k; struct arg *x1, *x2, *x3, *x4, *x5; } ARG; int f_1 (ARG* _) { return -1; } int f0 (ARG* _) { return 0; } int f1 (ARG* _) { return 1; } int eval(ARG* a) { return a->fn(a); } #define MAKE_ARG(...) (&(ARG){__VA_ARGS__}) #define FUN(...) MAKE_ARG(B, &k, __VA_ARGS__) int A(ARG*); int B(ARG* a) { int k = *a->k -= 1; return A(FUN(a, a->x1, a->x2, a->x3, a->x4)); } int A(ARG* a) { return *a->k <= 0 ? eval(a->x4) + eval(a->x5) : B(a); } int main(int argc, char **argv) { int k = argc == 2 ? strtol(argv[1], 0, 0) : 10; printf("%d\n", A(FUN(MAKE_ARG(f1), MAKE_ARG(f_1), MAKE_ARG(f_1), MAKE_ARG(f1), MAKE_ARG(f0)))); return 0; }
Generate a C# translation of this Perl snippet without changing its computational steps.
sub A { my ($k, $x1, $x2, $x3, $x4, $x5) = @_; my($B); $B = sub { A(--$k, $B, $x1, $x2, $x3, $x4) }; $k <= 0 ? &$x4 + &$x5 : &$B; } print A(10, sub{1}, sub {-1}, sub{-1}, sub{1}, sub{0} ), "\n";
using System; delegate T Func<T>(); class ManOrBoy { static void Main() { Console.WriteLine(A(10, C(1), C(-1), C(-1), C(1), C(0))); } static Func<int> C(int i) { return delegate { return i; }; } static int A(int k, Func<int> x1, Func<int> x2, Func<int> x3, Func<int> x4, Func<int> x5) { Func<int> b = null; b = delegate { k--; return A(k, b, x1, x2, x3, x4); }; return k <= 0 ? x4() + x5() : b(); } }
Produce a functionally identical C++ code for the snippet given in Perl.
sub A { my ($k, $x1, $x2, $x3, $x4, $x5) = @_; my($B); $B = sub { A(--$k, $B, $x1, $x2, $x3, $x4) }; $k <= 0 ? &$x4 + &$x5 : &$B; } print A(10, sub{1}, sub {-1}, sub{-1}, sub{1}, sub{0} ), "\n";
#include <iostream> #include <tr1/memory> using std::tr1::shared_ptr; using std::tr1::enable_shared_from_this; struct Arg { virtual int run() = 0; virtual ~Arg() { }; }; int A(int, shared_ptr<Arg>, shared_ptr<Arg>, shared_ptr<Arg>, shared_ptr<Arg>, shared_ptr<Arg>); class B : public Arg, public enable_shared_from_this<B> { private: int k; const shared_ptr<Arg> x1, x2, x3, x4; public: B(int _k, shared_ptr<Arg> _x1, shared_ptr<Arg> _x2, shared_ptr<Arg> _x3, shared_ptr<Arg> _x4) : k(_k), x1(_x1), x2(_x2), x3(_x3), x4(_x4) { } int run() { return A(--k, shared_from_this(), x1, x2, x3, x4); } }; class Const : public Arg { private: const int x; public: Const(int _x) : x(_x) { } int run () { return x; } }; int A(int k, shared_ptr<Arg> x1, shared_ptr<Arg> x2, shared_ptr<Arg> x3, shared_ptr<Arg> x4, shared_ptr<Arg> x5) { if (k <= 0) return x4->run() + x5->run(); else { shared_ptr<Arg> b(new B(k, x1, x2, x3, x4)); return b->run(); } } int main() { std::cout << A(10, shared_ptr<Arg>(new Const(1)), shared_ptr<Arg>(new Const(-1)), shared_ptr<Arg>(new Const(-1)), shared_ptr<Arg>(new Const(1)), shared_ptr<Arg>(new Const(0))) << std::endl; return 0; }
Convert the following code from Perl to Java, ensuring the logic remains intact.
sub A { my ($k, $x1, $x2, $x3, $x4, $x5) = @_; my($B); $B = sub { A(--$k, $B, $x1, $x2, $x3, $x4) }; $k <= 0 ? &$x4 + &$x5 : &$B; } print A(10, sub{1}, sub {-1}, sub{-1}, sub{1}, sub{0} ), "\n";
import java.util.function.DoubleSupplier; public class ManOrBoy { static double A(int k, DoubleSupplier x1, DoubleSupplier x2, DoubleSupplier x3, DoubleSupplier x4, DoubleSupplier x5) { DoubleSupplier B = new DoubleSupplier() { int m = k; public double getAsDouble() { return A(--m, this, x1, x2, x3, x4); } }; return k <= 0 ? x4.getAsDouble() + x5.getAsDouble() : B.getAsDouble(); } public static void main(String[] args) { System.out.println(A(10, () -> 1.0, () -> -1.0, () -> -1.0, () -> 1.0, () -> 0.0)); } }
Write a version of this Perl function in Python with identical behavior.
sub A { my ($k, $x1, $x2, $x3, $x4, $x5) = @_; my($B); $B = sub { A(--$k, $B, $x1, $x2, $x3, $x4) }; $k <= 0 ? &$x4 + &$x5 : &$B; } print A(10, sub{1}, sub {-1}, sub{-1}, sub{1}, sub{0} ), "\n";
import sys sys.setrecursionlimit(1025) def a(in_k, x1, x2, x3, x4, x5): k = [in_k] def b(): k[0] -= 1 return a(k[0], b, x1, x2, x3, x4) return x4() + x5() if k[0] <= 0 else b() x = lambda i: lambda: i print(a(10, x(1), x(-1), x(-1), x(1), x(0)))
Can you help me rewrite this code in Go instead of Perl, keeping it the same logically?
sub A { my ($k, $x1, $x2, $x3, $x4, $x5) = @_; my($B); $B = sub { A(--$k, $B, $x1, $x2, $x3, $x4) }; $k <= 0 ? &$x4 + &$x5 : &$B; } print A(10, sub{1}, sub {-1}, sub{-1}, sub{1}, sub{0} ), "\n";
package main import "fmt" func a(k int, x1, x2, x3, x4, x5 func() int) int { var b func() int b = func() int { k-- return a(k, b, x1, x2, x3, x4) } if k <= 0 { return x4() + x5() } return b() } func main() { x := func(i int) func() int { return func() int { return i } } fmt.Println(a(10, x(1), x(-1), x(-1), x(1), x(0))) }
Maintain the same structure and functionality when rewriting this code in C.
n <- function(x) function()x A <- function(k, x1, x2, x3, x4, x5) { B <- function() A(k <<- k-1, B, x1, x2, x3, x4) if (k <= 0) x4() + x5() else B() } A(10, n(1), n(-1), n(-1), n(1), n(0))
#include <stdio.h> #include <stdlib.h> typedef struct arg { int (*fn)(struct arg*); int *k; struct arg *x1, *x2, *x3, *x4, *x5; } ARG; int f_1 (ARG* _) { return -1; } int f0 (ARG* _) { return 0; } int f1 (ARG* _) { return 1; } int eval(ARG* a) { return a->fn(a); } #define MAKE_ARG(...) (&(ARG){__VA_ARGS__}) #define FUN(...) MAKE_ARG(B, &k, __VA_ARGS__) int A(ARG*); int B(ARG* a) { int k = *a->k -= 1; return A(FUN(a, a->x1, a->x2, a->x3, a->x4)); } int A(ARG* a) { return *a->k <= 0 ? eval(a->x4) + eval(a->x5) : B(a); } int main(int argc, char **argv) { int k = argc == 2 ? strtol(argv[1], 0, 0) : 10; printf("%d\n", A(FUN(MAKE_ARG(f1), MAKE_ARG(f_1), MAKE_ARG(f_1), MAKE_ARG(f1), MAKE_ARG(f0)))); return 0; }
Generate a C# translation of this R snippet without changing its computational steps.
n <- function(x) function()x A <- function(k, x1, x2, x3, x4, x5) { B <- function() A(k <<- k-1, B, x1, x2, x3, x4) if (k <= 0) x4() + x5() else B() } A(10, n(1), n(-1), n(-1), n(1), n(0))
using System; delegate T Func<T>(); class ManOrBoy { static void Main() { Console.WriteLine(A(10, C(1), C(-1), C(-1), C(1), C(0))); } static Func<int> C(int i) { return delegate { return i; }; } static int A(int k, Func<int> x1, Func<int> x2, Func<int> x3, Func<int> x4, Func<int> x5) { Func<int> b = null; b = delegate { k--; return A(k, b, x1, x2, x3, x4); }; return k <= 0 ? x4() + x5() : b(); } }
Please provide an equivalent version of this R code in C++.
n <- function(x) function()x A <- function(k, x1, x2, x3, x4, x5) { B <- function() A(k <<- k-1, B, x1, x2, x3, x4) if (k <= 0) x4() + x5() else B() } A(10, n(1), n(-1), n(-1), n(1), n(0))
#include <iostream> #include <tr1/memory> using std::tr1::shared_ptr; using std::tr1::enable_shared_from_this; struct Arg { virtual int run() = 0; virtual ~Arg() { }; }; int A(int, shared_ptr<Arg>, shared_ptr<Arg>, shared_ptr<Arg>, shared_ptr<Arg>, shared_ptr<Arg>); class B : public Arg, public enable_shared_from_this<B> { private: int k; const shared_ptr<Arg> x1, x2, x3, x4; public: B(int _k, shared_ptr<Arg> _x1, shared_ptr<Arg> _x2, shared_ptr<Arg> _x3, shared_ptr<Arg> _x4) : k(_k), x1(_x1), x2(_x2), x3(_x3), x4(_x4) { } int run() { return A(--k, shared_from_this(), x1, x2, x3, x4); } }; class Const : public Arg { private: const int x; public: Const(int _x) : x(_x) { } int run () { return x; } }; int A(int k, shared_ptr<Arg> x1, shared_ptr<Arg> x2, shared_ptr<Arg> x3, shared_ptr<Arg> x4, shared_ptr<Arg> x5) { if (k <= 0) return x4->run() + x5->run(); else { shared_ptr<Arg> b(new B(k, x1, x2, x3, x4)); return b->run(); } } int main() { std::cout << A(10, shared_ptr<Arg>(new Const(1)), shared_ptr<Arg>(new Const(-1)), shared_ptr<Arg>(new Const(-1)), shared_ptr<Arg>(new Const(1)), shared_ptr<Arg>(new Const(0))) << std::endl; return 0; }
Convert this R snippet to Java and keep its semantics consistent.
n <- function(x) function()x A <- function(k, x1, x2, x3, x4, x5) { B <- function() A(k <<- k-1, B, x1, x2, x3, x4) if (k <= 0) x4() + x5() else B() } A(10, n(1), n(-1), n(-1), n(1), n(0))
import java.util.function.DoubleSupplier; public class ManOrBoy { static double A(int k, DoubleSupplier x1, DoubleSupplier x2, DoubleSupplier x3, DoubleSupplier x4, DoubleSupplier x5) { DoubleSupplier B = new DoubleSupplier() { int m = k; public double getAsDouble() { return A(--m, this, x1, x2, x3, x4); } }; return k <= 0 ? x4.getAsDouble() + x5.getAsDouble() : B.getAsDouble(); } public static void main(String[] args) { System.out.println(A(10, () -> 1.0, () -> -1.0, () -> -1.0, () -> 1.0, () -> 0.0)); } }
Change the following R code into Python without altering its purpose.
n <- function(x) function()x A <- function(k, x1, x2, x3, x4, x5) { B <- function() A(k <<- k-1, B, x1, x2, x3, x4) if (k <= 0) x4() + x5() else B() } A(10, n(1), n(-1), n(-1), n(1), n(0))
import sys sys.setrecursionlimit(1025) def a(in_k, x1, x2, x3, x4, x5): k = [in_k] def b(): k[0] -= 1 return a(k[0], b, x1, x2, x3, x4) return x4() + x5() if k[0] <= 0 else b() x = lambda i: lambda: i print(a(10, x(1), x(-1), x(-1), x(1), x(0)))
Preserve the algorithm and functionality while converting the code from R to Go.
n <- function(x) function()x A <- function(k, x1, x2, x3, x4, x5) { B <- function() A(k <<- k-1, B, x1, x2, x3, x4) if (k <= 0) x4() + x5() else B() } A(10, n(1), n(-1), n(-1), n(1), n(0))
package main import "fmt" func a(k int, x1, x2, x3, x4, x5 func() int) int { var b func() int b = func() int { k-- return a(k, b, x1, x2, x3, x4) } if k <= 0 { return x4() + x5() } return b() } func main() { x := func(i int) func() int { return func() int { return i } } fmt.Println(a(10, x(1), x(-1), x(-1), x(1), x(0))) }
Ensure the translated C code behaves exactly like the original Racket snippet.
#lang racket (define (A k x1 x2 x3 x4 x5) (define (B) (set! k (- k 1)) (A k B x1 x2 x3 x4)) (if (<= k 0) (+ (x4) (x5)) (B))) (A 10 (lambda () 1) (lambda () -1) (lambda () -1) (lambda () 1) (lambda () 0))
#include <stdio.h> #include <stdlib.h> typedef struct arg { int (*fn)(struct arg*); int *k; struct arg *x1, *x2, *x3, *x4, *x5; } ARG; int f_1 (ARG* _) { return -1; } int f0 (ARG* _) { return 0; } int f1 (ARG* _) { return 1; } int eval(ARG* a) { return a->fn(a); } #define MAKE_ARG(...) (&(ARG){__VA_ARGS__}) #define FUN(...) MAKE_ARG(B, &k, __VA_ARGS__) int A(ARG*); int B(ARG* a) { int k = *a->k -= 1; return A(FUN(a, a->x1, a->x2, a->x3, a->x4)); } int A(ARG* a) { return *a->k <= 0 ? eval(a->x4) + eval(a->x5) : B(a); } int main(int argc, char **argv) { int k = argc == 2 ? strtol(argv[1], 0, 0) : 10; printf("%d\n", A(FUN(MAKE_ARG(f1), MAKE_ARG(f_1), MAKE_ARG(f_1), MAKE_ARG(f1), MAKE_ARG(f0)))); return 0; }
Convert this Racket block to C#, preserving its control flow and logic.
#lang racket (define (A k x1 x2 x3 x4 x5) (define (B) (set! k (- k 1)) (A k B x1 x2 x3 x4)) (if (<= k 0) (+ (x4) (x5)) (B))) (A 10 (lambda () 1) (lambda () -1) (lambda () -1) (lambda () 1) (lambda () 0))
using System; delegate T Func<T>(); class ManOrBoy { static void Main() { Console.WriteLine(A(10, C(1), C(-1), C(-1), C(1), C(0))); } static Func<int> C(int i) { return delegate { return i; }; } static int A(int k, Func<int> x1, Func<int> x2, Func<int> x3, Func<int> x4, Func<int> x5) { Func<int> b = null; b = delegate { k--; return A(k, b, x1, x2, x3, x4); }; return k <= 0 ? x4() + x5() : b(); } }
Rewrite this program in C++ while keeping its functionality equivalent to the Racket version.
#lang racket (define (A k x1 x2 x3 x4 x5) (define (B) (set! k (- k 1)) (A k B x1 x2 x3 x4)) (if (<= k 0) (+ (x4) (x5)) (B))) (A 10 (lambda () 1) (lambda () -1) (lambda () -1) (lambda () 1) (lambda () 0))
#include <iostream> #include <tr1/memory> using std::tr1::shared_ptr; using std::tr1::enable_shared_from_this; struct Arg { virtual int run() = 0; virtual ~Arg() { }; }; int A(int, shared_ptr<Arg>, shared_ptr<Arg>, shared_ptr<Arg>, shared_ptr<Arg>, shared_ptr<Arg>); class B : public Arg, public enable_shared_from_this<B> { private: int k; const shared_ptr<Arg> x1, x2, x3, x4; public: B(int _k, shared_ptr<Arg> _x1, shared_ptr<Arg> _x2, shared_ptr<Arg> _x3, shared_ptr<Arg> _x4) : k(_k), x1(_x1), x2(_x2), x3(_x3), x4(_x4) { } int run() { return A(--k, shared_from_this(), x1, x2, x3, x4); } }; class Const : public Arg { private: const int x; public: Const(int _x) : x(_x) { } int run () { return x; } }; int A(int k, shared_ptr<Arg> x1, shared_ptr<Arg> x2, shared_ptr<Arg> x3, shared_ptr<Arg> x4, shared_ptr<Arg> x5) { if (k <= 0) return x4->run() + x5->run(); else { shared_ptr<Arg> b(new B(k, x1, x2, x3, x4)); return b->run(); } } int main() { std::cout << A(10, shared_ptr<Arg>(new Const(1)), shared_ptr<Arg>(new Const(-1)), shared_ptr<Arg>(new Const(-1)), shared_ptr<Arg>(new Const(1)), shared_ptr<Arg>(new Const(0))) << std::endl; return 0; }
Translate the given Racket code snippet into Java without altering its behavior.
#lang racket (define (A k x1 x2 x3 x4 x5) (define (B) (set! k (- k 1)) (A k B x1 x2 x3 x4)) (if (<= k 0) (+ (x4) (x5)) (B))) (A 10 (lambda () 1) (lambda () -1) (lambda () -1) (lambda () 1) (lambda () 0))
import java.util.function.DoubleSupplier; public class ManOrBoy { static double A(int k, DoubleSupplier x1, DoubleSupplier x2, DoubleSupplier x3, DoubleSupplier x4, DoubleSupplier x5) { DoubleSupplier B = new DoubleSupplier() { int m = k; public double getAsDouble() { return A(--m, this, x1, x2, x3, x4); } }; return k <= 0 ? x4.getAsDouble() + x5.getAsDouble() : B.getAsDouble(); } public static void main(String[] args) { System.out.println(A(10, () -> 1.0, () -> -1.0, () -> -1.0, () -> 1.0, () -> 0.0)); } }
Transform the following Racket implementation into Python, maintaining the same output and logic.
#lang racket (define (A k x1 x2 x3 x4 x5) (define (B) (set! k (- k 1)) (A k B x1 x2 x3 x4)) (if (<= k 0) (+ (x4) (x5)) (B))) (A 10 (lambda () 1) (lambda () -1) (lambda () -1) (lambda () 1) (lambda () 0))
import sys sys.setrecursionlimit(1025) def a(in_k, x1, x2, x3, x4, x5): k = [in_k] def b(): k[0] -= 1 return a(k[0], b, x1, x2, x3, x4) return x4() + x5() if k[0] <= 0 else b() x = lambda i: lambda: i print(a(10, x(1), x(-1), x(-1), x(1), x(0)))
Produce a language-to-language conversion: from Racket to Go, same semantics.
#lang racket (define (A k x1 x2 x3 x4 x5) (define (B) (set! k (- k 1)) (A k B x1 x2 x3 x4)) (if (<= k 0) (+ (x4) (x5)) (B))) (A 10 (lambda () 1) (lambda () -1) (lambda () -1) (lambda () 1) (lambda () 0))
package main import "fmt" func a(k int, x1, x2, x3, x4, x5 func() int) int { var b func() int b = func() int { k-- return a(k, b, x1, x2, x3, x4) } if k <= 0 { return x4() + x5() } return b() } func main() { x := func(i int) func() int { return func() int { return i } } fmt.Println(a(10, x(1), x(-1), x(-1), x(1), x(0))) }
Produce a functionally identical C code for the snippet given in REXX.
do n=0 say 'n='n a(N,x1,x2,x3,x4,x5) end exit a: procedure; parse arg k, x1, x2, x3, x4, x5 if k<=0 then return f(x4) + f(x5) else return f(b) b: k=k-1; return a(k, b, x1, x2, x3, x4) f: interpret 'v=' arg(1)"()"; return v x1: procedure; return 1 x2: procedure; return -1 x3: procedure; return -1 x4: procedure; return 1 x5: procedure; return 0
#include <stdio.h> #include <stdlib.h> typedef struct arg { int (*fn)(struct arg*); int *k; struct arg *x1, *x2, *x3, *x4, *x5; } ARG; int f_1 (ARG* _) { return -1; } int f0 (ARG* _) { return 0; } int f1 (ARG* _) { return 1; } int eval(ARG* a) { return a->fn(a); } #define MAKE_ARG(...) (&(ARG){__VA_ARGS__}) #define FUN(...) MAKE_ARG(B, &k, __VA_ARGS__) int A(ARG*); int B(ARG* a) { int k = *a->k -= 1; return A(FUN(a, a->x1, a->x2, a->x3, a->x4)); } int A(ARG* a) { return *a->k <= 0 ? eval(a->x4) + eval(a->x5) : B(a); } int main(int argc, char **argv) { int k = argc == 2 ? strtol(argv[1], 0, 0) : 10; printf("%d\n", A(FUN(MAKE_ARG(f1), MAKE_ARG(f_1), MAKE_ARG(f_1), MAKE_ARG(f1), MAKE_ARG(f0)))); return 0; }
Rewrite this program in C# while keeping its functionality equivalent to the REXX version.
do n=0 say 'n='n a(N,x1,x2,x3,x4,x5) end exit a: procedure; parse arg k, x1, x2, x3, x4, x5 if k<=0 then return f(x4) + f(x5) else return f(b) b: k=k-1; return a(k, b, x1, x2, x3, x4) f: interpret 'v=' arg(1)"()"; return v x1: procedure; return 1 x2: procedure; return -1 x3: procedure; return -1 x4: procedure; return 1 x5: procedure; return 0
using System; delegate T Func<T>(); class ManOrBoy { static void Main() { Console.WriteLine(A(10, C(1), C(-1), C(-1), C(1), C(0))); } static Func<int> C(int i) { return delegate { return i; }; } static int A(int k, Func<int> x1, Func<int> x2, Func<int> x3, Func<int> x4, Func<int> x5) { Func<int> b = null; b = delegate { k--; return A(k, b, x1, x2, x3, x4); }; return k <= 0 ? x4() + x5() : b(); } }
Can you help me rewrite this code in C++ instead of REXX, keeping it the same logically?
do n=0 say 'n='n a(N,x1,x2,x3,x4,x5) end exit a: procedure; parse arg k, x1, x2, x3, x4, x5 if k<=0 then return f(x4) + f(x5) else return f(b) b: k=k-1; return a(k, b, x1, x2, x3, x4) f: interpret 'v=' arg(1)"()"; return v x1: procedure; return 1 x2: procedure; return -1 x3: procedure; return -1 x4: procedure; return 1 x5: procedure; return 0
#include <iostream> #include <tr1/memory> using std::tr1::shared_ptr; using std::tr1::enable_shared_from_this; struct Arg { virtual int run() = 0; virtual ~Arg() { }; }; int A(int, shared_ptr<Arg>, shared_ptr<Arg>, shared_ptr<Arg>, shared_ptr<Arg>, shared_ptr<Arg>); class B : public Arg, public enable_shared_from_this<B> { private: int k; const shared_ptr<Arg> x1, x2, x3, x4; public: B(int _k, shared_ptr<Arg> _x1, shared_ptr<Arg> _x2, shared_ptr<Arg> _x3, shared_ptr<Arg> _x4) : k(_k), x1(_x1), x2(_x2), x3(_x3), x4(_x4) { } int run() { return A(--k, shared_from_this(), x1, x2, x3, x4); } }; class Const : public Arg { private: const int x; public: Const(int _x) : x(_x) { } int run () { return x; } }; int A(int k, shared_ptr<Arg> x1, shared_ptr<Arg> x2, shared_ptr<Arg> x3, shared_ptr<Arg> x4, shared_ptr<Arg> x5) { if (k <= 0) return x4->run() + x5->run(); else { shared_ptr<Arg> b(new B(k, x1, x2, x3, x4)); return b->run(); } } int main() { std::cout << A(10, shared_ptr<Arg>(new Const(1)), shared_ptr<Arg>(new Const(-1)), shared_ptr<Arg>(new Const(-1)), shared_ptr<Arg>(new Const(1)), shared_ptr<Arg>(new Const(0))) << std::endl; return 0; }
Convert this REXX block to Java, preserving its control flow and logic.
do n=0 say 'n='n a(N,x1,x2,x3,x4,x5) end exit a: procedure; parse arg k, x1, x2, x3, x4, x5 if k<=0 then return f(x4) + f(x5) else return f(b) b: k=k-1; return a(k, b, x1, x2, x3, x4) f: interpret 'v=' arg(1)"()"; return v x1: procedure; return 1 x2: procedure; return -1 x3: procedure; return -1 x4: procedure; return 1 x5: procedure; return 0
import java.util.function.DoubleSupplier; public class ManOrBoy { static double A(int k, DoubleSupplier x1, DoubleSupplier x2, DoubleSupplier x3, DoubleSupplier x4, DoubleSupplier x5) { DoubleSupplier B = new DoubleSupplier() { int m = k; public double getAsDouble() { return A(--m, this, x1, x2, x3, x4); } }; return k <= 0 ? x4.getAsDouble() + x5.getAsDouble() : B.getAsDouble(); } public static void main(String[] args) { System.out.println(A(10, () -> 1.0, () -> -1.0, () -> -1.0, () -> 1.0, () -> 0.0)); } }
Ensure the translated Python code behaves exactly like the original REXX snippet.
do n=0 say 'n='n a(N,x1,x2,x3,x4,x5) end exit a: procedure; parse arg k, x1, x2, x3, x4, x5 if k<=0 then return f(x4) + f(x5) else return f(b) b: k=k-1; return a(k, b, x1, x2, x3, x4) f: interpret 'v=' arg(1)"()"; return v x1: procedure; return 1 x2: procedure; return -1 x3: procedure; return -1 x4: procedure; return 1 x5: procedure; return 0
import sys sys.setrecursionlimit(1025) def a(in_k, x1, x2, x3, x4, x5): k = [in_k] def b(): k[0] -= 1 return a(k[0], b, x1, x2, x3, x4) return x4() + x5() if k[0] <= 0 else b() x = lambda i: lambda: i print(a(10, x(1), x(-1), x(-1), x(1), x(0)))
Convert the following code from REXX to Go, ensuring the logic remains intact.
do n=0 say 'n='n a(N,x1,x2,x3,x4,x5) end exit a: procedure; parse arg k, x1, x2, x3, x4, x5 if k<=0 then return f(x4) + f(x5) else return f(b) b: k=k-1; return a(k, b, x1, x2, x3, x4) f: interpret 'v=' arg(1)"()"; return v x1: procedure; return 1 x2: procedure; return -1 x3: procedure; return -1 x4: procedure; return 1 x5: procedure; return 0
package main import "fmt" func a(k int, x1, x2, x3, x4, x5 func() int) int { var b func() int b = func() int { k-- return a(k, b, x1, x2, x3, x4) } if k <= 0 { return x4() + x5() } return b() } func main() { x := func(i int) func() int { return func() int { return i } } fmt.Println(a(10, x(1), x(-1), x(-1), x(1), x(0))) }
Produce a language-to-language conversion: from Ruby to C, same semantics.
def a(k, x1, x2, x3, x4, x5) b = uninitialized -> typeof(k) b = ->() { k -= 1; a(k, b, x1, x2, x3, x4) } k <= 0 ? x4.call + x5.call : b.call end puts a(10, -> {1}, -> {-1}, -> {-1}, -> {1}, -> {0})
#include <stdio.h> #include <stdlib.h> typedef struct arg { int (*fn)(struct arg*); int *k; struct arg *x1, *x2, *x3, *x4, *x5; } ARG; int f_1 (ARG* _) { return -1; } int f0 (ARG* _) { return 0; } int f1 (ARG* _) { return 1; } int eval(ARG* a) { return a->fn(a); } #define MAKE_ARG(...) (&(ARG){__VA_ARGS__}) #define FUN(...) MAKE_ARG(B, &k, __VA_ARGS__) int A(ARG*); int B(ARG* a) { int k = *a->k -= 1; return A(FUN(a, a->x1, a->x2, a->x3, a->x4)); } int A(ARG* a) { return *a->k <= 0 ? eval(a->x4) + eval(a->x5) : B(a); } int main(int argc, char **argv) { int k = argc == 2 ? strtol(argv[1], 0, 0) : 10; printf("%d\n", A(FUN(MAKE_ARG(f1), MAKE_ARG(f_1), MAKE_ARG(f_1), MAKE_ARG(f1), MAKE_ARG(f0)))); return 0; }
Please provide an equivalent version of this Ruby code in C#.
def a(k, x1, x2, x3, x4, x5) b = uninitialized -> typeof(k) b = ->() { k -= 1; a(k, b, x1, x2, x3, x4) } k <= 0 ? x4.call + x5.call : b.call end puts a(10, -> {1}, -> {-1}, -> {-1}, -> {1}, -> {0})
using System; delegate T Func<T>(); class ManOrBoy { static void Main() { Console.WriteLine(A(10, C(1), C(-1), C(-1), C(1), C(0))); } static Func<int> C(int i) { return delegate { return i; }; } static int A(int k, Func<int> x1, Func<int> x2, Func<int> x3, Func<int> x4, Func<int> x5) { Func<int> b = null; b = delegate { k--; return A(k, b, x1, x2, x3, x4); }; return k <= 0 ? x4() + x5() : b(); } }
Produce a functionally identical C++ code for the snippet given in Ruby.
def a(k, x1, x2, x3, x4, x5) b = uninitialized -> typeof(k) b = ->() { k -= 1; a(k, b, x1, x2, x3, x4) } k <= 0 ? x4.call + x5.call : b.call end puts a(10, -> {1}, -> {-1}, -> {-1}, -> {1}, -> {0})
#include <iostream> #include <tr1/memory> using std::tr1::shared_ptr; using std::tr1::enable_shared_from_this; struct Arg { virtual int run() = 0; virtual ~Arg() { }; }; int A(int, shared_ptr<Arg>, shared_ptr<Arg>, shared_ptr<Arg>, shared_ptr<Arg>, shared_ptr<Arg>); class B : public Arg, public enable_shared_from_this<B> { private: int k; const shared_ptr<Arg> x1, x2, x3, x4; public: B(int _k, shared_ptr<Arg> _x1, shared_ptr<Arg> _x2, shared_ptr<Arg> _x3, shared_ptr<Arg> _x4) : k(_k), x1(_x1), x2(_x2), x3(_x3), x4(_x4) { } int run() { return A(--k, shared_from_this(), x1, x2, x3, x4); } }; class Const : public Arg { private: const int x; public: Const(int _x) : x(_x) { } int run () { return x; } }; int A(int k, shared_ptr<Arg> x1, shared_ptr<Arg> x2, shared_ptr<Arg> x3, shared_ptr<Arg> x4, shared_ptr<Arg> x5) { if (k <= 0) return x4->run() + x5->run(); else { shared_ptr<Arg> b(new B(k, x1, x2, x3, x4)); return b->run(); } } int main() { std::cout << A(10, shared_ptr<Arg>(new Const(1)), shared_ptr<Arg>(new Const(-1)), shared_ptr<Arg>(new Const(-1)), shared_ptr<Arg>(new Const(1)), shared_ptr<Arg>(new Const(0))) << std::endl; return 0; }
Write the same code in Python as shown below in Ruby.
def a(k, x1, x2, x3, x4, x5) b = uninitialized -> typeof(k) b = ->() { k -= 1; a(k, b, x1, x2, x3, x4) } k <= 0 ? x4.call + x5.call : b.call end puts a(10, -> {1}, -> {-1}, -> {-1}, -> {1}, -> {0})
import sys sys.setrecursionlimit(1025) def a(in_k, x1, x2, x3, x4, x5): k = [in_k] def b(): k[0] -= 1 return a(k[0], b, x1, x2, x3, x4) return x4() + x5() if k[0] <= 0 else b() x = lambda i: lambda: i print(a(10, x(1), x(-1), x(-1), x(1), x(0)))
Transform the following Ruby implementation into Go, maintaining the same output and logic.
def a(k, x1, x2, x3, x4, x5) b = uninitialized -> typeof(k) b = ->() { k -= 1; a(k, b, x1, x2, x3, x4) } k <= 0 ? x4.call + x5.call : b.call end puts a(10, -> {1}, -> {-1}, -> {-1}, -> {1}, -> {0})
package main import "fmt" func a(k int, x1, x2, x3, x4, x5 func() int) int { var b func() int b = func() int { k-- return a(k, b, x1, x2, x3, x4) } if k <= 0 { return x4() + x5() } return b() } func main() { x := func(i int) func() int { return func() int { return i } } fmt.Println(a(10, x(1), x(-1), x(-1), x(1), x(0))) }
Write the same algorithm in C as shown in this Scala implementation.
typealias Func = () -> Int fun a(k: Int, x1: Func, x2: Func, x3: Func, x4: Func, x5: Func): Int { var kk = k fun b(): Int = a(--kk, ::b, x1, x2, x3, x4) return if (kk <= 0) x4() + x5() else b() } fun main(args: Array<String>) { println(" k a") for (k in 0..12) { println("${"%2d".format(k)}: ${a(k, { 1 }, { -1 }, { -1 }, { 1 }, { 0 })}") } }
#include <stdio.h> #include <stdlib.h> typedef struct arg { int (*fn)(struct arg*); int *k; struct arg *x1, *x2, *x3, *x4, *x5; } ARG; int f_1 (ARG* _) { return -1; } int f0 (ARG* _) { return 0; } int f1 (ARG* _) { return 1; } int eval(ARG* a) { return a->fn(a); } #define MAKE_ARG(...) (&(ARG){__VA_ARGS__}) #define FUN(...) MAKE_ARG(B, &k, __VA_ARGS__) int A(ARG*); int B(ARG* a) { int k = *a->k -= 1; return A(FUN(a, a->x1, a->x2, a->x3, a->x4)); } int A(ARG* a) { return *a->k <= 0 ? eval(a->x4) + eval(a->x5) : B(a); } int main(int argc, char **argv) { int k = argc == 2 ? strtol(argv[1], 0, 0) : 10; printf("%d\n", A(FUN(MAKE_ARG(f1), MAKE_ARG(f_1), MAKE_ARG(f_1), MAKE_ARG(f1), MAKE_ARG(f0)))); return 0; }
Write a version of this Scala function in C# with identical behavior.
typealias Func = () -> Int fun a(k: Int, x1: Func, x2: Func, x3: Func, x4: Func, x5: Func): Int { var kk = k fun b(): Int = a(--kk, ::b, x1, x2, x3, x4) return if (kk <= 0) x4() + x5() else b() } fun main(args: Array<String>) { println(" k a") for (k in 0..12) { println("${"%2d".format(k)}: ${a(k, { 1 }, { -1 }, { -1 }, { 1 }, { 0 })}") } }
using System; delegate T Func<T>(); class ManOrBoy { static void Main() { Console.WriteLine(A(10, C(1), C(-1), C(-1), C(1), C(0))); } static Func<int> C(int i) { return delegate { return i; }; } static int A(int k, Func<int> x1, Func<int> x2, Func<int> x3, Func<int> x4, Func<int> x5) { Func<int> b = null; b = delegate { k--; return A(k, b, x1, x2, x3, x4); }; return k <= 0 ? x4() + x5() : b(); } }
Generate an equivalent C++ version of this Scala code.
typealias Func = () -> Int fun a(k: Int, x1: Func, x2: Func, x3: Func, x4: Func, x5: Func): Int { var kk = k fun b(): Int = a(--kk, ::b, x1, x2, x3, x4) return if (kk <= 0) x4() + x5() else b() } fun main(args: Array<String>) { println(" k a") for (k in 0..12) { println("${"%2d".format(k)}: ${a(k, { 1 }, { -1 }, { -1 }, { 1 }, { 0 })}") } }
#include <iostream> #include <tr1/memory> using std::tr1::shared_ptr; using std::tr1::enable_shared_from_this; struct Arg { virtual int run() = 0; virtual ~Arg() { }; }; int A(int, shared_ptr<Arg>, shared_ptr<Arg>, shared_ptr<Arg>, shared_ptr<Arg>, shared_ptr<Arg>); class B : public Arg, public enable_shared_from_this<B> { private: int k; const shared_ptr<Arg> x1, x2, x3, x4; public: B(int _k, shared_ptr<Arg> _x1, shared_ptr<Arg> _x2, shared_ptr<Arg> _x3, shared_ptr<Arg> _x4) : k(_k), x1(_x1), x2(_x2), x3(_x3), x4(_x4) { } int run() { return A(--k, shared_from_this(), x1, x2, x3, x4); } }; class Const : public Arg { private: const int x; public: Const(int _x) : x(_x) { } int run () { return x; } }; int A(int k, shared_ptr<Arg> x1, shared_ptr<Arg> x2, shared_ptr<Arg> x3, shared_ptr<Arg> x4, shared_ptr<Arg> x5) { if (k <= 0) return x4->run() + x5->run(); else { shared_ptr<Arg> b(new B(k, x1, x2, x3, x4)); return b->run(); } } int main() { std::cout << A(10, shared_ptr<Arg>(new Const(1)), shared_ptr<Arg>(new Const(-1)), shared_ptr<Arg>(new Const(-1)), shared_ptr<Arg>(new Const(1)), shared_ptr<Arg>(new Const(0))) << std::endl; return 0; }
Preserve the algorithm and functionality while converting the code from Scala to Java.
typealias Func = () -> Int fun a(k: Int, x1: Func, x2: Func, x3: Func, x4: Func, x5: Func): Int { var kk = k fun b(): Int = a(--kk, ::b, x1, x2, x3, x4) return if (kk <= 0) x4() + x5() else b() } fun main(args: Array<String>) { println(" k a") for (k in 0..12) { println("${"%2d".format(k)}: ${a(k, { 1 }, { -1 }, { -1 }, { 1 }, { 0 })}") } }
import java.util.function.DoubleSupplier; public class ManOrBoy { static double A(int k, DoubleSupplier x1, DoubleSupplier x2, DoubleSupplier x3, DoubleSupplier x4, DoubleSupplier x5) { DoubleSupplier B = new DoubleSupplier() { int m = k; public double getAsDouble() { return A(--m, this, x1, x2, x3, x4); } }; return k <= 0 ? x4.getAsDouble() + x5.getAsDouble() : B.getAsDouble(); } public static void main(String[] args) { System.out.println(A(10, () -> 1.0, () -> -1.0, () -> -1.0, () -> 1.0, () -> 0.0)); } }
Produce a functionally identical Python code for the snippet given in Scala.
typealias Func = () -> Int fun a(k: Int, x1: Func, x2: Func, x3: Func, x4: Func, x5: Func): Int { var kk = k fun b(): Int = a(--kk, ::b, x1, x2, x3, x4) return if (kk <= 0) x4() + x5() else b() } fun main(args: Array<String>) { println(" k a") for (k in 0..12) { println("${"%2d".format(k)}: ${a(k, { 1 }, { -1 }, { -1 }, { 1 }, { 0 })}") } }
import sys sys.setrecursionlimit(1025) def a(in_k, x1, x2, x3, x4, x5): k = [in_k] def b(): k[0] -= 1 return a(k[0], b, x1, x2, x3, x4) return x4() + x5() if k[0] <= 0 else b() x = lambda i: lambda: i print(a(10, x(1), x(-1), x(-1), x(1), x(0)))
Maintain the same structure and functionality when rewriting this code in Go.
typealias Func = () -> Int fun a(k: Int, x1: Func, x2: Func, x3: Func, x4: Func, x5: Func): Int { var kk = k fun b(): Int = a(--kk, ::b, x1, x2, x3, x4) return if (kk <= 0) x4() + x5() else b() } fun main(args: Array<String>) { println(" k a") for (k in 0..12) { println("${"%2d".format(k)}: ${a(k, { 1 }, { -1 }, { -1 }, { 1 }, { 0 })}") } }
package main import "fmt" func a(k int, x1, x2, x3, x4, x5 func() int) int { var b func() int b = func() int { k-- return a(k, b, x1, x2, x3, x4) } if k <= 0 { return x4() + x5() } return b() } func main() { x := func(i int) func() int { return func() int { return i } } fmt.Println(a(10, x(1), x(-1), x(-1), x(1), x(0))) }
Produce a language-to-language conversion: from Swift to C, same semantics.
func A(_ k: Int, _ x1: @escaping () -> Int, _ x2: @escaping () -> Int, _ x3: @escaping () -> Int, _ x4: @escaping () -> Int, _ x5: @escaping () -> Int) -> Int { var k1 = k func B() -> Int { k1 -= 1 return A(k1, B, x1, x2, x3, x4) } if k1 <= 0 { return x4() + x5() } else { return B() } } print(A(10, {1}, {-1}, {-1}, {1}, {0}))
#include <stdio.h> #include <stdlib.h> typedef struct arg { int (*fn)(struct arg*); int *k; struct arg *x1, *x2, *x3, *x4, *x5; } ARG; int f_1 (ARG* _) { return -1; } int f0 (ARG* _) { return 0; } int f1 (ARG* _) { return 1; } int eval(ARG* a) { return a->fn(a); } #define MAKE_ARG(...) (&(ARG){__VA_ARGS__}) #define FUN(...) MAKE_ARG(B, &k, __VA_ARGS__) int A(ARG*); int B(ARG* a) { int k = *a->k -= 1; return A(FUN(a, a->x1, a->x2, a->x3, a->x4)); } int A(ARG* a) { return *a->k <= 0 ? eval(a->x4) + eval(a->x5) : B(a); } int main(int argc, char **argv) { int k = argc == 2 ? strtol(argv[1], 0, 0) : 10; printf("%d\n", A(FUN(MAKE_ARG(f1), MAKE_ARG(f_1), MAKE_ARG(f_1), MAKE_ARG(f1), MAKE_ARG(f0)))); return 0; }
Preserve the algorithm and functionality while converting the code from Swift to C#.
func A(_ k: Int, _ x1: @escaping () -> Int, _ x2: @escaping () -> Int, _ x3: @escaping () -> Int, _ x4: @escaping () -> Int, _ x5: @escaping () -> Int) -> Int { var k1 = k func B() -> Int { k1 -= 1 return A(k1, B, x1, x2, x3, x4) } if k1 <= 0 { return x4() + x5() } else { return B() } } print(A(10, {1}, {-1}, {-1}, {1}, {0}))
using System; delegate T Func<T>(); class ManOrBoy { static void Main() { Console.WriteLine(A(10, C(1), C(-1), C(-1), C(1), C(0))); } static Func<int> C(int i) { return delegate { return i; }; } static int A(int k, Func<int> x1, Func<int> x2, Func<int> x3, Func<int> x4, Func<int> x5) { Func<int> b = null; b = delegate { k--; return A(k, b, x1, x2, x3, x4); }; return k <= 0 ? x4() + x5() : b(); } }
Rewrite this program in C++ while keeping its functionality equivalent to the Swift version.
func A(_ k: Int, _ x1: @escaping () -> Int, _ x2: @escaping () -> Int, _ x3: @escaping () -> Int, _ x4: @escaping () -> Int, _ x5: @escaping () -> Int) -> Int { var k1 = k func B() -> Int { k1 -= 1 return A(k1, B, x1, x2, x3, x4) } if k1 <= 0 { return x4() + x5() } else { return B() } } print(A(10, {1}, {-1}, {-1}, {1}, {0}))
#include <iostream> #include <tr1/memory> using std::tr1::shared_ptr; using std::tr1::enable_shared_from_this; struct Arg { virtual int run() = 0; virtual ~Arg() { }; }; int A(int, shared_ptr<Arg>, shared_ptr<Arg>, shared_ptr<Arg>, shared_ptr<Arg>, shared_ptr<Arg>); class B : public Arg, public enable_shared_from_this<B> { private: int k; const shared_ptr<Arg> x1, x2, x3, x4; public: B(int _k, shared_ptr<Arg> _x1, shared_ptr<Arg> _x2, shared_ptr<Arg> _x3, shared_ptr<Arg> _x4) : k(_k), x1(_x1), x2(_x2), x3(_x3), x4(_x4) { } int run() { return A(--k, shared_from_this(), x1, x2, x3, x4); } }; class Const : public Arg { private: const int x; public: Const(int _x) : x(_x) { } int run () { return x; } }; int A(int k, shared_ptr<Arg> x1, shared_ptr<Arg> x2, shared_ptr<Arg> x3, shared_ptr<Arg> x4, shared_ptr<Arg> x5) { if (k <= 0) return x4->run() + x5->run(); else { shared_ptr<Arg> b(new B(k, x1, x2, x3, x4)); return b->run(); } } int main() { std::cout << A(10, shared_ptr<Arg>(new Const(1)), shared_ptr<Arg>(new Const(-1)), shared_ptr<Arg>(new Const(-1)), shared_ptr<Arg>(new Const(1)), shared_ptr<Arg>(new Const(0))) << std::endl; return 0; }
Write the same code in Java as shown below in Swift.
func A(_ k: Int, _ x1: @escaping () -> Int, _ x2: @escaping () -> Int, _ x3: @escaping () -> Int, _ x4: @escaping () -> Int, _ x5: @escaping () -> Int) -> Int { var k1 = k func B() -> Int { k1 -= 1 return A(k1, B, x1, x2, x3, x4) } if k1 <= 0 { return x4() + x5() } else { return B() } } print(A(10, {1}, {-1}, {-1}, {1}, {0}))
import java.util.function.DoubleSupplier; public class ManOrBoy { static double A(int k, DoubleSupplier x1, DoubleSupplier x2, DoubleSupplier x3, DoubleSupplier x4, DoubleSupplier x5) { DoubleSupplier B = new DoubleSupplier() { int m = k; public double getAsDouble() { return A(--m, this, x1, x2, x3, x4); } }; return k <= 0 ? x4.getAsDouble() + x5.getAsDouble() : B.getAsDouble(); } public static void main(String[] args) { System.out.println(A(10, () -> 1.0, () -> -1.0, () -> -1.0, () -> 1.0, () -> 0.0)); } }
Generate an equivalent Python version of this Swift code.
func A(_ k: Int, _ x1: @escaping () -> Int, _ x2: @escaping () -> Int, _ x3: @escaping () -> Int, _ x4: @escaping () -> Int, _ x5: @escaping () -> Int) -> Int { var k1 = k func B() -> Int { k1 -= 1 return A(k1, B, x1, x2, x3, x4) } if k1 <= 0 { return x4() + x5() } else { return B() } } print(A(10, {1}, {-1}, {-1}, {1}, {0}))
import sys sys.setrecursionlimit(1025) def a(in_k, x1, x2, x3, x4, x5): k = [in_k] def b(): k[0] -= 1 return a(k[0], b, x1, x2, x3, x4) return x4() + x5() if k[0] <= 0 else b() x = lambda i: lambda: i print(a(10, x(1), x(-1), x(-1), x(1), x(0)))
Write the same code in Go as shown below in Swift.
func A(_ k: Int, _ x1: @escaping () -> Int, _ x2: @escaping () -> Int, _ x3: @escaping () -> Int, _ x4: @escaping () -> Int, _ x5: @escaping () -> Int) -> Int { var k1 = k func B() -> Int { k1 -= 1 return A(k1, B, x1, x2, x3, x4) } if k1 <= 0 { return x4() + x5() } else { return B() } } print(A(10, {1}, {-1}, {-1}, {1}, {0}))
package main import "fmt" func a(k int, x1, x2, x3, x4, x5 func() int) int { var b func() int b = func() int { k-- return a(k, b, x1, x2, x3, x4) } if k <= 0 { return x4() + x5() } return b() } func main() { x := func(i int) func() int { return func() int { return i } } fmt.Println(a(10, x(1), x(-1), x(-1), x(1), x(0))) }
Rewrite this program in C while keeping its functionality equivalent to the Tcl version.
proc A {k x1 x2 x3 x4 x5} { expr {$k<=0 ? [eval $x4]+[eval $x5] : [B \ } proc B {level} { upvar $level k k x1 x1 x2 x2 x3 x3 x4 x4 incr k -1 A $k [info level 0] $x1 $x2 $x3 $x4 } proc C {val} {return $val} interp recursionlimit {} 1157 A 10 {C 1} {C -1} {C -1} {C 1} {C 0}
#include <stdio.h> #include <stdlib.h> typedef struct arg { int (*fn)(struct arg*); int *k; struct arg *x1, *x2, *x3, *x4, *x5; } ARG; int f_1 (ARG* _) { return -1; } int f0 (ARG* _) { return 0; } int f1 (ARG* _) { return 1; } int eval(ARG* a) { return a->fn(a); } #define MAKE_ARG(...) (&(ARG){__VA_ARGS__}) #define FUN(...) MAKE_ARG(B, &k, __VA_ARGS__) int A(ARG*); int B(ARG* a) { int k = *a->k -= 1; return A(FUN(a, a->x1, a->x2, a->x3, a->x4)); } int A(ARG* a) { return *a->k <= 0 ? eval(a->x4) + eval(a->x5) : B(a); } int main(int argc, char **argv) { int k = argc == 2 ? strtol(argv[1], 0, 0) : 10; printf("%d\n", A(FUN(MAKE_ARG(f1), MAKE_ARG(f_1), MAKE_ARG(f_1), MAKE_ARG(f1), MAKE_ARG(f0)))); return 0; }
Transform the following Tcl implementation into C#, maintaining the same output and logic.
proc A {k x1 x2 x3 x4 x5} { expr {$k<=0 ? [eval $x4]+[eval $x5] : [B \ } proc B {level} { upvar $level k k x1 x1 x2 x2 x3 x3 x4 x4 incr k -1 A $k [info level 0] $x1 $x2 $x3 $x4 } proc C {val} {return $val} interp recursionlimit {} 1157 A 10 {C 1} {C -1} {C -1} {C 1} {C 0}
using System; delegate T Func<T>(); class ManOrBoy { static void Main() { Console.WriteLine(A(10, C(1), C(-1), C(-1), C(1), C(0))); } static Func<int> C(int i) { return delegate { return i; }; } static int A(int k, Func<int> x1, Func<int> x2, Func<int> x3, Func<int> x4, Func<int> x5) { Func<int> b = null; b = delegate { k--; return A(k, b, x1, x2, x3, x4); }; return k <= 0 ? x4() + x5() : b(); } }
Port the provided Tcl code into C++ while preserving the original functionality.
proc A {k x1 x2 x3 x4 x5} { expr {$k<=0 ? [eval $x4]+[eval $x5] : [B \ } proc B {level} { upvar $level k k x1 x1 x2 x2 x3 x3 x4 x4 incr k -1 A $k [info level 0] $x1 $x2 $x3 $x4 } proc C {val} {return $val} interp recursionlimit {} 1157 A 10 {C 1} {C -1} {C -1} {C 1} {C 0}
#include <iostream> #include <tr1/memory> using std::tr1::shared_ptr; using std::tr1::enable_shared_from_this; struct Arg { virtual int run() = 0; virtual ~Arg() { }; }; int A(int, shared_ptr<Arg>, shared_ptr<Arg>, shared_ptr<Arg>, shared_ptr<Arg>, shared_ptr<Arg>); class B : public Arg, public enable_shared_from_this<B> { private: int k; const shared_ptr<Arg> x1, x2, x3, x4; public: B(int _k, shared_ptr<Arg> _x1, shared_ptr<Arg> _x2, shared_ptr<Arg> _x3, shared_ptr<Arg> _x4) : k(_k), x1(_x1), x2(_x2), x3(_x3), x4(_x4) { } int run() { return A(--k, shared_from_this(), x1, x2, x3, x4); } }; class Const : public Arg { private: const int x; public: Const(int _x) : x(_x) { } int run () { return x; } }; int A(int k, shared_ptr<Arg> x1, shared_ptr<Arg> x2, shared_ptr<Arg> x3, shared_ptr<Arg> x4, shared_ptr<Arg> x5) { if (k <= 0) return x4->run() + x5->run(); else { shared_ptr<Arg> b(new B(k, x1, x2, x3, x4)); return b->run(); } } int main() { std::cout << A(10, shared_ptr<Arg>(new Const(1)), shared_ptr<Arg>(new Const(-1)), shared_ptr<Arg>(new Const(-1)), shared_ptr<Arg>(new Const(1)), shared_ptr<Arg>(new Const(0))) << std::endl; return 0; }
Convert the following code from Tcl to Java, ensuring the logic remains intact.
proc A {k x1 x2 x3 x4 x5} { expr {$k<=0 ? [eval $x4]+[eval $x5] : [B \ } proc B {level} { upvar $level k k x1 x1 x2 x2 x3 x3 x4 x4 incr k -1 A $k [info level 0] $x1 $x2 $x3 $x4 } proc C {val} {return $val} interp recursionlimit {} 1157 A 10 {C 1} {C -1} {C -1} {C 1} {C 0}
import java.util.function.DoubleSupplier; public class ManOrBoy { static double A(int k, DoubleSupplier x1, DoubleSupplier x2, DoubleSupplier x3, DoubleSupplier x4, DoubleSupplier x5) { DoubleSupplier B = new DoubleSupplier() { int m = k; public double getAsDouble() { return A(--m, this, x1, x2, x3, x4); } }; return k <= 0 ? x4.getAsDouble() + x5.getAsDouble() : B.getAsDouble(); } public static void main(String[] args) { System.out.println(A(10, () -> 1.0, () -> -1.0, () -> -1.0, () -> 1.0, () -> 0.0)); } }
Change the following Tcl code into Python without altering its purpose.
proc A {k x1 x2 x3 x4 x5} { expr {$k<=0 ? [eval $x4]+[eval $x5] : [B \ } proc B {level} { upvar $level k k x1 x1 x2 x2 x3 x3 x4 x4 incr k -1 A $k [info level 0] $x1 $x2 $x3 $x4 } proc C {val} {return $val} interp recursionlimit {} 1157 A 10 {C 1} {C -1} {C -1} {C 1} {C 0}
import sys sys.setrecursionlimit(1025) def a(in_k, x1, x2, x3, x4, x5): k = [in_k] def b(): k[0] -= 1 return a(k[0], b, x1, x2, x3, x4) return x4() + x5() if k[0] <= 0 else b() x = lambda i: lambda: i print(a(10, x(1), x(-1), x(-1), x(1), x(0)))
Produce a language-to-language conversion: from Tcl to Go, same semantics.
proc A {k x1 x2 x3 x4 x5} { expr {$k<=0 ? [eval $x4]+[eval $x5] : [B \ } proc B {level} { upvar $level k k x1 x1 x2 x2 x3 x3 x4 x4 incr k -1 A $k [info level 0] $x1 $x2 $x3 $x4 } proc C {val} {return $val} interp recursionlimit {} 1157 A 10 {C 1} {C -1} {C -1} {C 1} {C 0}
package main import "fmt" func a(k int, x1, x2, x3, x4, x5 func() int) int { var b func() int b = func() int { k-- return a(k, b, x1, x2, x3, x4) } if k <= 0 { return x4() + x5() } return b() } func main() { x := func(i int) func() int { return func() int { return i } } fmt.Println(a(10, x(1), x(-1), x(-1), x(1), x(0))) }
Rewrite this program in PHP while keeping its functionality equivalent to the Rust version.
use std::cell::Cell; trait Arg { fn run(&self) -> i32; } impl Arg for i32 { fn run(&self) -> i32 { *self } } struct B<'a> { k: &'a Cell<i32>, x1: &'a Arg, x2: &'a Arg, x3: &'a Arg, x4: &'a Arg, } impl<'a> Arg for B<'a> { fn run(&self) -> i32 { self.k.set(self.k.get() - 1); a(self.k.get(), self, self.x1, self.x2, self.x3, self.x4) } } fn a(k: i32, x1: &Arg, x2: &Arg, x3: &Arg, x4: &Arg, x5: &Arg) -> i32 { if k <= 0 { x4.run() + x5.run() } else { B{ k: &Cell::new(k), x1, x2, x3, x4 }.run() } } pub fn main() { println!("{}", a(10, &1, &-1, &-1, &1, &0)); }
<?php function A($k,$x1,$x2,$x3,$x4,$x5) { $b = function () use (&$b,&$k,$x1,$x2,$x3,$x4) { return A(--$k,$b,$x1,$x2,$x3,$x4); }; return $k <= 0 ? $x4() + $x5() : $b(); } echo A(10, function () { return 1; }, function () { return -1; }, function () { return -1; }, function () { return 1; }, function () { return 0; }) . "\n"; ?>
Write the same algorithm in PHP as shown in this Ada implementation.
with Ada.Text_IO; use Ada.Text_IO; procedure Man_Or_Boy is function Zero return Integer is begin return 0; end Zero; function One return Integer is begin return 1; end One; function Neg return Integer is begin return -1; end Neg; function A ( K : Integer; X1, X2, X3, X4, X5 : access function return Integer ) return Integer is M : Integer := K; function B return Integer is begin M := M - 1; return A (M, B'Access, X1, X2, X3, X4); end B; begin if M <= 0 then return X4.all + X5.all; else return B; end if; end A; begin Put_Line ( Integer'Image ( A ( 10, One'Access, Neg'Access, Neg'Access, One'Access, Zero'Access ) ) ); end Man_Or_Boy;
<?php function A($k,$x1,$x2,$x3,$x4,$x5) { $b = function () use (&$b,&$k,$x1,$x2,$x3,$x4) { return A(--$k,$b,$x1,$x2,$x3,$x4); }; return $k <= 0 ? $x4() + $x5() : $b(); } echo A(10, function () { return 1; }, function () { return -1; }, function () { return -1; }, function () { return 1; }, function () { return 0; }) . "\n"; ?>
Maintain the same structure and functionality when rewriting this code in PHP.
HIMEM = PAGE + 200000000 : FOR k% = 0 TO 20 PRINT FNA(k%, ^FN1(), ^FN_1(), ^FN_1(), ^FN1(), ^FN0()) NEXT END DEF FNA(k%, x1%, x2%, x3%, x4%, x5%) IF k% <= 0 THEN = FN(x4%)(x4%) + FN(x5%)(x5%) LOCAL b{} DIM b{fn%, k%, x1%, x2%, x3%, x4%, x5%} b.fn% = !^FNB() b.k% = k% b.x1% = x1% b.x2% = x2% b.x3% = x3% b.x4% = x4% b.x5% = x5% DEF FNB(!(^b{}+4)) b.k% -= 1 = FNA(b.k%, b{}, b.x1%, b.x2%, b.x3%, b.x4%) DEF FN0(d%) = 0 DEF FN1(d%) = 1 DEF FN_1(d%) = -1
<?php function A($k,$x1,$x2,$x3,$x4,$x5) { $b = function () use (&$b,&$k,$x1,$x2,$x3,$x4) { return A(--$k,$b,$x1,$x2,$x3,$x4); }; return $k <= 0 ? $x4() + $x5() : $b(); } echo A(10, function () { return 1; }, function () { return -1; }, function () { return -1; }, function () { return 1; }, function () { return 0; }) . "\n"; ?>
Port the following code from Common_Lisp to PHP with equivalent syntax and logic.
(declare a) (defn man-or-boy "Man or boy test for Clojure" [k] (let [k (atom k)] (a k (fn [] 1) (fn [] -1) (fn [] -1) (fn [] 1) (fn [] 0)))) (defn a [k x1 x2 x3 x4 x5] (let [k (atom @k)] (letfn [(b [] (swap! k dec) (a k b x1 x2 x3 x4))] (if (<= @k 0) (+ (x4) (x5)) (b))))) (man-or-boy 10)
<?php function A($k,$x1,$x2,$x3,$x4,$x5) { $b = function () use (&$b,&$k,$x1,$x2,$x3,$x4) { return A(--$k,$b,$x1,$x2,$x3,$x4); }; return $k <= 0 ? $x4() + $x5() : $b(); } echo A(10, function () { return 1; }, function () { return -1; }, function () { return -1; }, function () { return 1; }, function () { return 0; }) . "\n"; ?>
Please provide an equivalent version of this D code in PHP.
import core.stdc.stdio: printf; int a(int k, const lazy int x1, const lazy int x2, const lazy int x3, const lazy int x4, const lazy int x5) pure { int b() { k--; return a(k, b(), x1, x2, x3, x4); } return k <= 0 ? x4 + x5 : b(); } void main() { printf("%d\n", a(10, 1, -1, -1, 1, 0)); }
<?php function A($k,$x1,$x2,$x3,$x4,$x5) { $b = function () use (&$b,&$k,$x1,$x2,$x3,$x4) { return A(--$k,$b,$x1,$x2,$x3,$x4); }; return $k <= 0 ? $x4() + $x5() : $b(); } echo A(10, function () { return 1; }, function () { return -1; }, function () { return -1; }, function () { return 1; }, function () { return 0; }) . "\n"; ?>