## Search found 6 matches

Thu Jun 04, 2009 8:20 pm
Forum: Scheme
Topic: Yet another basic question
Replies: 7
Views: 11371

### Re: Yet another basic question

That's got it.
Kevin
Wed Jun 03, 2009 9:35 pm
Forum: Scheme
Topic: Yet another basic question
Replies: 7
Views: 11371

### Re: Yet another basic question

I think that's it. Can you give me a quick and dirty example of how to use time-apply? It seems to want two arguments (first a procedure, then a list). It's not following the same form as "runtime."
Many thanks
Wed Jun 03, 2009 9:31 am
Forum: Scheme
Topic: Yet another basic question
Replies: 7
Views: 11371

### Re: Yet another basic question

I'm using Dr. Scheme.
Tue Jun 02, 2009 8:38 pm
Forum: Scheme
Topic: Yet another basic question
Replies: 7
Views: 11371

### Yet another basic question

Greetings. I'm working my way through "Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs" and am working on a program that calls for the use of the primitive "runtime" as a way to measure how long it took the computer to calculate the answer. Unfortunately, my version of Scheme doesn't recognize "ru...
Wed Apr 29, 2009 9:01 pm
Forum: Scheme
Topic: Really, really basic question (negative numbers)
Replies: 2
Views: 5181

### Re: Really, really basic question (negative numbers)

Ah. I told you it was a basic question.
Many thanks. Works like a charm.
Kevin
Tue Apr 28, 2009 10:11 pm
Forum: Scheme
Topic: Really, really basic question (negative numbers)
Replies: 2
Views: 5181

### Really, really basic question (negative numbers)

Greetings. For what I'm sure is a really basic reason, I can't get negative numbers to work. I keep getting error messages about an undefined identifier. A simple example (finding the absolute value of an integer) that's copied directly out of SICP: (define (ab x) (cond ((< x 0) (-x)) (else x))) > (...