Fundamentals of Computer Science I (CS151.02 2007S)

Pairs and Pair Structures

This reading is also available in PDF.

Summary: As you should know by now, cons is one of the core Scheme procedures. Most typically, cons is applied to two arguments, a value and a list, and we think of it as prepending the value to the front of the list. You also know from experimentation that cons can not take fewer than two arguments nor more than two arguments. You have also found that cons can still be called with a non-list as the second argument, and in this case the thing built has a strange dot before that element. In this reading, we consider what is happening behind the scenes when you call cons. We also use cons to build structures other than lists.


Box-and-Pointer Diagrams

As we have seen, Scheme uses cons to build lists. As you may recall, cons takes two arguments. Up to this point, the first element has been a value and the second has been a list. When you call cons, Scheme actually builds a structure in memory with two parts, one of which refers to the first argument to cons and the other of which refers to the second. This structure is called a cons cell or a pair.

Let us now consider a graphical way to represent the result of a cons procedure. The basic idea is to use a rectangle, divided in half, to represent the result of the cons. From the first half of the rectangle, we draw an arrow to the first element of a list, its car; from the second half of the rectangle, we draw an arrow to the rest of the list, its cdr. When the cdr is null (the empty list), we draw a diagonal line through the right half of the rectangle to indicate that the list stops at that point.

For instance, the value of the expression (cons 'a null) would be represented in this notation as follows:

A divided rectangle with an A on the left and the null list on the right

Since the value of the expression (cons 'a null) is the list (a), this diagram represents (a) as well.

Now consider the value of the expression

(cons 'b (cons 'a null))

in other words, the list (b a). Here, we draw another rectangle, where the head points to b and the tail points to the representation of (a) that we already have seen. The result is:

a divided rectangle with B on the left and a pointer to the preceding diagram on the right

Similarly, the list (d c b a) is the value of the expression (cons 'd (cons 'c (cons 'b (cons 'a null)))) and would be drawn as follows:

a diagram including four divided rectangles

A similar approach may be used for lists that have other lists as elements. For example, consider the list ((a) b (c d) e). This list contains four components, so at the top level we will need four rectangles, just as in the previous example for the list (d c b a). Here, however, the first component designates the list (a), which itself involves the box-and-pointer diagram already discussed. Similarly, the list (c d) has two boxes for its two components (as in the diagram for (b a) above). The resulting diagram is:

a diagram including seven divided rectangles

Throughout these diagrams, the empty list is represented by a null pointer, a diagonal line. Thus, the list containing the empty list, (()) -- that is, the value of the expression (cons null null) -- is represented by a rectangle with lines through both halves:

a divided rectangle with a null list in each half

Pairs That Are Not Lists

While we consistently have discussed cons in the context of lists, Scheme allows cons to be applied even when the second argument is not a list. For example, (cons 'a 'b) is a legal expression; its value is represented by the following box-and-pointer diagram:

a divided rectangle with A on the left and B on the right

You may have noticed that some of your lists ended with a dot before the last character. In fact, whenever Scheme is asked to print out a sequence of linked pairs that don't end with null, it uses dot notation, as in (a . b). Here, the dot indicates that cons has been applied, but the second argument is not a list. Similarly, the value of (cons 1 'a) is the pair (1 . a), and the value of (cons "Henry" "Walker") is ("Henry" . "Walker"). Using a box-and-pointer representation, this last result would be drawn as follows:

a divided rectangle with the string Henry on the left and the string Walker on the right

The car and cdr procedures can be used to recover the halves of one of these improper lists:

> (car (cons 'a 'b))
> (cdr (cons 'a 'b))

Note that the cdr of such a structure is not a list.

When Scheme tries to print out a pair structure, it uses what we might call an optimistic assumption. If the next thing is null or a pair, it assumes that it's a list, and therefore uses a space before the next object. When it hits the end and finds no null, it inserts the dot there, but not earlier.

A Pair Predicate

The pair? predicate returns #t when it is given any structure that is printed as a dotted pair, or indeed any structure that cons can possibly return as its value. (Basically, pair? determines whether the object it is given is one of those two-box rectangles.)

Recursion with Pairs

Just as lists can be nested within lists, so pairs can be nested within pairs, as deeply as you like. For instance, here is a pair structure that contains the first eight natural numbers:

a diagram including seven divided rectangles

To build this structure in Scheme, we can use repeated calls to cons, thus:

(cons (cons (cons 0 1)
            (cons 2 3))
      (cons (cons 4 5)
            (cons 6 7)))

or we can use the dotted-pair notation inside a literal constant beginning with a quote:

'(((0 . 1) . (2 . 3)) . ((4 . 5) . (6 . 7)))

(As we've said previously, we'd prefer that you use cons rather than quote to build structures.)

If we have a pair structure that is constructed by repeated invocations of cons, starting from constituents of some simple type such as numbers or strings, we call such a structure a tree. (We often prefix the word tree with the type from which the tree is built, such as number tree; alternately we suffix the word tree with of and then the type, as in tree of numbers.) We will look at trees in some more depth in the reading on deep recursion. For now, let's consider a basic approach.

In particular, when we are dealing with a tree, we can use pair recursion, which adapts the shape of the computation to the shape of the particular pair structure on which we operate. In pair recursion, the base cases are the values that are not pairs, and must therefore be operated on directly. For the non-base cases -- those that are pairs -- we invoke the procedure recursively twice (once for the car, once for the cdr) and combine the values of the recursive calls to get the final result of the operation.

For instance, here is how we'd find the sum of the numbers in a pair structure like the one diagrammed above.

;;; Procedure:
;;;   sum-of-number-tree
;;; Parameters:
;;;   ntree, a number tree
;;; Purpose:
;;;   Sums all the numbers in ntree.
;;; Produces:
;;;   sum, a number
;;; Preconditions:
;;;   ntree is a number tree.  That is, it consists only of numbers
;;;   and cons cells.
;;; Postconditions:
;;;   sum is the sum of all numbers in ntree.
(define sum-of-number-tree
  (lambda (ntree)
    (if (pair? ntree)
        (+ (sum-of-number-tree (car ntree))
           (sum-of-number-tree (cdr ntree)))

> (sum-of-number-tree (cons (cons (cons 0 1)
                                     (cons 2 3))
                               (cons (cons 4 5)
                                     (cons 6 7))))

When this procedure is applied to a base case -- that is, just a number rather than a collection of numbers fitted into a pair structure -- it returns the number unchanged:

> (sum-of-number-tree 19)

There is no such thing as an empty pair analogous to an empty list. Every pair has exactly two components, and it is always valid to take the car and the cdr of a pair. So the base case for a pair recursion is just any value that is not itself a pair.

Why Pay Attention to Pairs

You may be wondering why we ask you to pay attention to these pair things. (You'll probably be wondering why we ask you to pay so much attention after doing the lab). There are a few reasons. First, we find that students better understand lists (and related structures) if they have an understanding of what's going on behind the scenes. Second, there are many instances in which we are better off building trees (like those above) than lists. Third, pair structures provide an additional mechanism for thinking about recursion.

The pair structures also reveal a bit about Scheme terminology. In the first computers on which LISP (the forerunner of Scheme) was implemented, there was an underlying memory structure that had two cells, which made it a convenient way to implement pairs. On that computer, the operations used to remove values from the structure were car (shorthand for contents of address register) and cdr (shorthand for contents of decrement register, even though some people mistakenly claim it stands for contents of data register).




Disclaimer: I usually create these pages on the fly, which means that I rarely proofread them and they may contain bad grammar and incorrect details. It also means that I tend to update them regularly (see the history for more details). Feel free to contact me with any suggestions for changes.

This document was generated by Siteweaver on Thu Sep 13 20:55:12 2007.
The source to the document was last modified on Sun Mar 11 16:16:15 2007.
This document may be found at

You may wish to validate this document's HTML ; Valid CSS! ; Creative Commons License

Samuel A. Rebelsky,

Copyright © 2007 Samuel A. Rebelsky. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 2.5 License. To view a copy of this license, visit or send a letter to Creative Commons, 543 Howard Street, 5th Floor, San Francisco, California, 94105, USA.