Skip to content

Added Cooley-Tukey in Common Lisp #786

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
merged 9 commits into from
Jan 1, 2021

Conversation

0xJonas
Copy link
Contributor

@0xJonas 0xJonas commented Nov 11, 2020

Essentially a port of my Scala PR (#746) which appears to be stuck in review.

Copy link
Contributor

@Trashtalk217 Trashtalk217 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

An excellent submission, glad that you're interested @0xJonas. I've been the single person implementing the algorithms in Common Lisp up until now and I'm happy to see another Lisper in the archive.

One last thing, It would maybe help to put some extra comments throughout the code. The archive tries to provide good code examples for people learning programming languages and it can be helpful to provide some extra information.

The code is still fine as is, however, and if you correct the small formatting problems, it should be ready for merging.

@0xJonas
Copy link
Contributor Author

0xJonas commented Dec 27, 2020

  • Changed indentation on the if-statements
  • Fixed that one whitespace
  • Made iterative implementation use a loop. It is actually much simpler now.
  • Added comments

@0xJonas 0xJonas requested a review from Trashtalk217 December 28, 2020 10:57
Copy link
Contributor

@Trashtalk217 Trashtalk217 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thank you for the quick response, I assumed that you were going to do points for sentences, so I left some suggestions for the comments.

I've rechecked some of the other common lisp code and how comments and docstrings are handled is all over the place (even when one person made all of them), so don't worry about it. Just make sure it's consistent within the file.

0xJonas and others added 7 commits December 28, 2020 20:13
Co-authored-by: Trashtalk217 <trashtalk217@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Trashtalk217 <trashtalk217@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Trashtalk217 <trashtalk217@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Trashtalk217 <trashtalk217@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Trashtalk217 <trashtalk217@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Trashtalk217 <trashtalk217@gmail.com>
@0xJonas
Copy link
Contributor Author

0xJonas commented Dec 28, 2020

Oops, I forgot to update a line number after the previous commit.

@Trashtalk217
Copy link
Contributor

Sorry for the late confirmation, I misunderstood something. But it's good to merge!

@Trashtalk217 Trashtalk217 merged commit 02dd353 into algorithm-archivists:master Jan 1, 2021
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants