lisp change machine

dynamic programming mixed with HOFs. originally an exam question. brain on fire for an undergrad fuckwit like myself

(define (change amt coins)
(cond
((= amt 0) '(()))
((or (<= amt 0) (null? coins)) '())
(else
(fold-right (lambda (a b) (append a b))
'()
(map
(lambda (n)
(map
(lambda (u)
(append (list n) u))
(change (- amt n)
(filter (lambda (k) (>= k n)) coins))))
coins)))))

;; -----------------------------------------------------------------------

(define (display-nl u)
(display u)
(newline))

(define display-elements
(lambda (u)
(map display-nl u)))

(define (demo r k)
(display-nl '-----------------------------)
(display r) (display ';;) (display k) (newline)
(display-nl '=============================)
(display-elements (change r k))
(display-nl '-----------------------------)
(newline))

;; -----------------------------------------------------------------------

(newline)

(demo 5 '(1 2 5))
(demo 13 '(1 3 5 7))
$ ./lisp <change.lisp

Loaded `prefix.txt'

-----------------------------
5;;(1 2 5)
=============================
(1 1 1 1 1)
(1 1 1 2)
(1 2 2)
(5)
-----------------------------

-----------------------------
13;;(1 3 5 7)
=============================
(1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1)
(1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 3)
(1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 5)
(1 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 3)
(1 1 1 1 1 1 7)
(1 1 1 1 1 3 5)
(1 1 1 1 3 3 3)
(1 1 1 3 7)
(1 1 1 5 5)
(1 1 3 3 5)
(1 3 3 3 3)
(1 5 7)
(3 3 7)
(3 5 5)
-----------------------------

>>36
I don't know of any bigger waste of my time than to master any language according to that definition. To me, mastering the BNF description (of certain kinds of languages) is as good as mastering the language. Implementation quirks should either be standardized or removed from the language.