What's the functional version of a nested test? - clojure

I'm converting some C++ code to Clojure, and I want
to return a graph g with a bunch of edges added to it.
I pass in the the number of vertices, the graph, and
the test predicate (eg, a function that could depend on i, j, randomness, ...) something like this:
(defn addSomeEdges [v g test-p]
(doseq [i (range v)]
(doseq [j (range (dec i))]
(if test-p
(add-edges g [i j] )
)))
g)
the problem, of course, is that (add-edges) returns a new g. How can I capture this updated graph using best practices Clojure, please? It seems so simple and natural in C++.

Iterativly accumulating information looks like a reducing function if you split it into two parts:
Generate a bunch of edges to consider including.
Test each edge and if it passes, include it. Otherwise pass the result on unchanged
Which can be written using reduce
user> (defn add-edge [g i j]
(assoc g i j))
#'user/add-edge
user> (add-edge {1 2} 2 1)
{1 2, 2 1}
user> (defn addSomeEdges [v g test-p]
(reduce (fn [graph [i j]] ;; this takes the current graph, the points,
(if (test-p graph i j) ;; decides if the edge should be created.
(add-edge graph i j) ;; and returns the next graph
graph)) ;; or returns the graph unchanged.
g ;; This is the initial graph
(for [i (range v)
j (range (dec i))]
[i j]))) ;; this generates the candidate edges to check.
#'user/addSomeEdges
and let's run it!
user> (addSomeEdges 4 {1 2} (fn [g i j] (rand-nth [true false])))
{1 2, 2 0}
user> (addSomeEdges 4 {1 2} (fn [g i j] (rand-nth [true false])))
{1 2, 3 0}
user> (addSomeEdges 4 {1 2} (fn [g i j] (rand-nth [true false])))
{1 2, 2 0, 3 1}
When you think of other tests you can thread these calls together:
user> (as-> {1 2} g
(addSomeEdges 4 g (fn [g i j] (rand-nth [true false])))
(addSomeEdges 7 g (fn [g i j] (< i j)))
(addSomeEdges 9 g (fn [g i j] (contains? (set (keys g)) j))))
{1 2, 3 1, 4 1, 5 3, 6 4, 7 5, 8 6}

There is more than one solution to this. Sometimes, though, when you have a fundamentally mutable/imperative problem, you should just use a mutable/imperative solution:
; simplest version using mutation
(defn addSomeEdges [v g test-p]
(let [g-local (atom g)]
(doseq [i (range v)]
(doseq [j (range (dec i))]
(when (test-p i j ...) ; what other args does this need?
(swap! g-local add-edges [i j]))))
#g-local))
I was a little uncertain on the semtantics of test-p, so that part may need refinement.
Note the swap! will call add-edges like so:
(add-edges <curr val of g-local> [i j])
See the Clojure CheatSheet & ClojureDocs.org for more info.

Related

Extracting two map elements with the largest distance in Clojure

I am trying to extract two elements of a map with the largest distance. For that, I defined the function for calculating the distance and can obtain the distance between the first element (p1) and other elements of the map. But I need to calculate distances between the second item (p2) and the next ones (p3, p4, p5), the third item (p3) and (p4, p5), the fourth item (p4) and fifth item (p5). Then I need to identify the maximum amount between all distances and return the 2 items with the largest distance and the distance itself. Any help is highly appreciated.
Here is my code:
(defn eclid-dist
[u v]
(Math/sqrt (apply + (map #(* % %) (mapv - u v)))))
(def error
{:p1 [1 2 3]
:p2 [4 5 6]
:p3 [7 8 9]
:p4 [1 2 3]
:p5 [6 5 4]})
(dotimes [i (dec (count error))]
(let [dis (eclid-dist (second (nth (seq error) 0))
(second (nth (seq error) (+ i 1))))
max-error (max dis)]
(println [':dis' dis ':max-error' max-error])))
I tried to save each calculated distance as a vector element separately to prevent overwriting but it was not successful.
You could use the for macro for this. It let's you combine two nested loops to test for all pairs. Then you can use max-key to pick the pair with largest distance:
(defn find-largest-dist-pair [vec-map]
(apply max-key second
(for [[[k0 v0] & r] (iterate rest vec-map)
:while r
[k1 v1] r]
[[k0 k1] (eclid-dist v0 v1)])))
(find-largest-dist-pair error)
;; => [[:p3 :p4] 10.392304845413264]
There is nothing wrong with eclid-dist, you could just use the dedicated Clojure library clojure.math (and ->> thread-last macro for better readability) and rewrite it like this:
(:require [clojure.math :as m])
(defn distance [u v]
(->> (mapv - u v)
(mapv #(m/pow % 2))
(reduce +)
m/sqrt))
Your main problem is, how to create unique pairs of points from your data. You could write a recursive function for this:
(defn unique-pairs [point-seq]
(let [[f & r] point-seq]
(when (seq r)
(concat (map #(vector f %) r)
(unique-pairs r)))))
(def error {:p1 [1 2 3]
:p2 [4 5 6]
:p3 [7 8 9]
:p4 [1 2 3]
:p5 [6 5 4]})
(unique-pairs (vals error))
or use library clojure.math.combinatorics:
Dependency: [org.clojure/math.combinatorics "0.1.6"]
(:require [clojure.math.combinatorics :as combi])
(combi/combinations (vals error) 2)
Note that these functions have slightly different results- it doesn't affect the final result, but if you can, you should use combinations.
Now, you have to compute distance for all these pairs and return the pair with the largest one:
(defn max-distance [point-map]
(->> (combi/combinations (vals point-map) 2)
(map (fn [[u v]] {:u u :v v :distance (distance u v)}))
(apply max-key :distance)))
(max-distance error)
=> {:u [1 2 3], :v [7 8 9], :distance 10.392304845413264}

Concatenate elements to list by using loop in clojure?

I am trying to get into Lisps and FP by trying out the 99 problems.
Here is the problem statement (Problem 15)
Replicate the elements of a list a given number of times.
I have come up with the following code which simply returns an empty list []
I am unable to figure out why my code doesn't work and would really appreciate some help.
(defn replicateList "Replicates each element of the list n times" [l n]
(loop [initList l returnList []]
(if (empty? initList)
returnList
(let [[head & rest] initList]
(loop [x 0]
(when (< x n)
(conj returnList head)
(recur (inc x))))
(recur rest returnList)))))
(defn -main
"Main" []
(test/is (=
(replicateList [1 2] 2)
[1 1 2 2])
"Failed basic test")
)
copying my comment to answer:
this line: (conj returnList head) doesn't modify returnlist, rather it just drops the result in your case. You should restructure your program to pass the accumulated list further to the next iteration. But there are better ways to do this in clojure. Like (defn replicate-list [data times] (apply concat (repeat times data)))
If you still need the loop/recur version for educational reasons, i would go with this:
(defn replicate-list [data times]
(loop [[h & t :as input] data times times result []]
(if-not (pos? times)
result
(if (empty? input)
(recur data (dec times) result)
(recur t times (conj result h))))))
user> (replicate-list [1 2 3] 3)
;;=> [1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3]
user> (replicate-list [ ] 2)
;;=> []
user> (replicate-list [1 2 3] -1)
;;=> []
update
based on the clarified question, the simplest way to do this is
(defn replicate-list [data times]
(mapcat (partial repeat times) data))
user> (replicate-list [1 2 3] 3)
;;=> (1 1 1 2 2 2 3 3 3)
and the loop/recur variant:
(defn replicate-list [data times]
(loop [[h & t :as data] data n 0 res []]
(cond (empty? data) res
(>= n times) (recur t 0 res)
:else (recur data (inc n) (conj res h)))))
user> (replicate-list [1 2 3] 3)
;;=> [1 1 1 2 2 2 3 3 3]
user> (replicate-list [1 2 3] 0)
;;=> []
user> (replicate-list [] 10)
;;=> []
Here is a version based on the original post, with minimal modifications:
;; Based on the original version posted
(defn replicateList "Replicates each element of the list n times" [l n]
(loop [initList l returnList []]
(if (empty? initList)
returnList
(let [[head & rest] initList]
(recur
rest
(loop [inner-returnList returnList
x 0]
(if (< x n)
(recur (conj inner-returnList head) (inc x))
inner-returnList)))))))
Please keep in mind that Clojure is mainly a functional language, meaning that most functions produce their results as a new return value instead of updating in place. So, as pointed out in the comment, the line (conj returnList head) will not have an effect, because it's return value is ignored.
The above version works, but does not really take advantage of Clojure's sequence processing facilities. So here are two other suggestions for solving your problem:
;; Using lazy seqs and reduce
(defn replicateList2 [l n]
(reduce into [] (map #(take n (repeat %)) l)))
;; Yet another way using transducers
(defn replicateList3 [l n]
(transduce
(comp (map #(take n (repeat %)))
cat
)
conj
[]
l))
One thing is not clear about your question though: From your implementation, it looks like you want to create a new list where each element is repeated n times, e.g.
playground.replicate> (replicateList [1 2 3] 4)
[1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 3]
But if you would instead like this result
playground.replicate> (replicateList [1 2 3] 4)
[1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3]
the answer to your question will be different.
If you want to learn idiomatic Clojure you should try to find a solution without such low level facilities as loop. Rather try to combine higher level functions like take, repeat, repeatedly. If you're feeling adventurous you might throw in laziness as well. Clojure's sequences are lazy, that is they get evaluated only when needed.
One example I came up with would be
(defn repeat-list-items [l n]
(lazy-seq
(when-let [s (seq l)]
(concat (repeat n (first l))
(repeat-list-items (next l) n)))))
Please also note the common naming with kebab-case
This seems to do what you want pretty well and works for an unlimited input (see the call (range) below), too:
experi.core> (def l [:a :b :c])
#'experi.core/
experi.core> (repeat-list-items l 2)
(:a :a :b :b :c :c)
experi.core> (repeat-list-items l 0)
()
experi.core> (repeat-list-items l 1)
(:a :b :c)
experi.core> (take 10 (drop 10000 (repeat-list-items (range) 4)))
(2500 2500 2500 2500 2501 2501 2501 2501 2502 2502)

clojure - contains?, conj and recur

I'm trying to write a function with recur that cut the sequence as soon as it encounters a repetition ([1 2 3 1 4] should return [1 2 3]), this is my function:
(defn cut-at-repetition [a-seq]
(loop[[head & tail] a-seq, coll '()]
(if (empty? head)
coll
(if (contains? coll head)
coll
(recur (rest tail) (conj coll head))))))
The first problem is with the contains? that throws an exception, I tried replacing it with some but with no success. The second problem is in the recur part which will also throw an exception
You've made several mistakes:
You've used contains? on a sequence. It only works on associative
collections. Use some instead.
You've tested the first element of the sequence (head) for empty?.
Test the whole sequence.
Use a vector to accumulate the answer. conj adds elements to the
front of a list, reversing the answer.
Correcting these, we get
(defn cut-at-repetition [a-seq]
(loop [[head & tail :as all] a-seq, coll []]
(if (empty? all)
coll
(if (some #(= head %) coll)
coll
(recur tail (conj coll head))))))
(cut-at-repetition [1 2 3 1 4])
=> [1 2 3]
The above works, but it's slow, since it scans the whole sequence for every absent element. So better use a set.
Let's call the function take-distinct, since it is similar to take-while. If we follow that precedent and make it lazy, we can do it thus:
(defn take-distinct [coll]
(letfn [(td [seen unseen]
(lazy-seq
(when-let [[x & xs] (seq unseen)]
(when-not (contains? seen x)
(cons x (td (conj seen x) xs))))))]
(td #{} coll)))
We get the expected results for finite sequences:
(map (juxt identity take-distinct) [[] (range 5) [2 3 2]]
=> ([[] nil] [(0 1 2 3 4) (0 1 2 3 4)] [[2 3 2] (2 3)])
And we can take as much as we need from an endless result:
(take 10 (take-distinct (range)))
=> (0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9)
I would call your eager version take-distinctv, on the map -> mapv precedent. And I'd do it this way:
(defn take-distinctv [coll]
(loop [seen-vec [], seen-set #{}, unseen coll]
(if-let [[x & xs] (seq unseen)]
(if (contains? seen-set x)
seen-vec
(recur (conj seen-vec x) (conj seen-set x) xs))
seen-vec)))
Notice that we carry the seen elements twice:
as a vector, to return as the solution; and
as a set, to test for membership of.
Two of the three mistakes were commented on by #cfrick.
There is a tradeoff between saving a line or two and making the logic as simple & explicit as possible. To make it as obvious as possible, I would do it something like this:
(defn cut-at-repetition
[values]
(loop [remaining-values values
result []]
(if (empty? remaining-values)
result
(let [found-values (into #{} result)
new-value (first remaining-values)]
(if (contains? found-values new-value)
result
(recur
(rest remaining-values)
(conj result new-value)))))))
(cut-at-repetition [1 2 3 1 4]) => [1 2 3]
Also, be sure to bookmark The Clojure Cheatsheet and always keep a browser tab open to it.
I'd like to hear feedback on this utility function which I wrote for myself (uses filter with stateful pred instead of a loop):
(defn my-distinct
"Returns distinct values from a seq, as defined by id-getter."
[id-getter coll]
(let [seen-ids (volatile! #{})
seen? (fn [id] (if-not (contains? #seen-ids id)
(vswap! seen-ids conj id)))]
(filter (comp seen? id-getter) coll)))
(my-distinct identity "abracadabra")
; (\a \b \r \c \d)
(->> (for [i (range 50)] {:id (mod (* i i) 21) :value i})
(my-distinct :id)
pprint)
; ({:id 0, :value 0}
; {:id 1, :value 1}
; {:id 4, :value 2}
; {:id 9, :value 3}
; {:id 16, :value 4}
; {:id 15, :value 6}
; {:id 7, :value 7}
; {:id 18, :value 9})
Docs of filter says "pred must be free of side-effects" but I'm not sure if it is ok in this case. Is filter guaranteed to iterate over the sequence in order and not for example take skips forward?

How to create a map from a list of key-value pairs using values as a predicate in Clojure?

Just started learning Clojure, so I imagine my main issue is I don't know how to formulate the problem correctly to find an existing solution. I have a map:
{[0 1 "a"] 2, [0 1 "b"] 1, [1 1 "a"] 1}
and I'd like to "transform" it to:
{[0 1] "a", [1 1] "a"}
i.e. use the two first elements of the composite key as they new key and the third element as the value for the key-value pair that had the highest value in the original map.
I can easily create a new map structure:
=> (into {} (for [[[x y z] v] {[0 1 "a"] 2, [0 1 "b"] 1, [1 1 "a"] 1}] [[x y] {z v}]))
{[0 1] {"b" 1}, [1 1] {"a" 1}}
but into accepts no predicates so last one wins. I also experimented with :let and merge-with but can't seem to correctly refer to the map, eliminate the unwanted pairs or replace values of the map while processing.
You can do this by threading together a series of sequence transformations.
(->> data
(group-by #(->> % key (take 2)))
vals
(map (comp first first (partial sort-by (comp - val))))
(map (juxt #(subvec % 0 2) #(% 2)))
(into {}))
;{[0 1] "a", [1 1] "a"}
... where
(def data {[0 1 "a"] 2, [0 1 "b"] 1, [1 1 "a"] 1})
You build up the solution line by line. I recommend you follow in the footsteps of the construction, starting with ...
(->> data
(group-by #(->> % key (take 2)))
;{(0 1) [[[0 1 "a"] 2] [[0 1 "b"] 1]], (1 1) [[[1 1 "a"] 1]]}
Stacking up layers of (lazy) sequences can run fairly slowly, but the transducers available in Clojure 1.7 will allow you to write faster code in this idiom, as seen in this excellent answer.
Into tends to be most useful when you just need to take a seq of values and with no additional transformation construct a result from it using only conj. Anything else where you are performing construction tends to be better suited by preprocessing such as sorting, or by a reduction which allows you to perform accumulator introspection such as you want here.
First of all we have to be able to compare two strings..
(defn greater? [^String a ^String b]
(> (.compareTo a b) 0))
Now we can write a transformation that compares the current value in the accumulator to the "next" value and keeps the maximum. -> used somewhat gratuitusly to make the update function more readable.
(defn transform [input]
(-> (fn [acc [[x y z] _]] ;; take the acc, [k, v], destructure k discard v
(let [key [x y]] ;; construct key into accumulator
(if-let [v (acc key)] ;; if the key is set
(if (greater? z v) ;; and z (the new val) is greater
(assoc acc key z) ;; then update
acc) ;; else do nothing
(assoc acc key z)))) ;; else update
(reduce {} input))) ;; do that over all [k, v]s from empty acc
user> (def m {[0 1 "a"] 2, [0 1 "b"] 1, [1 1 "a"] 1})
#'user/m
user> (->> m
keys
sort
reverse
(mapcat (fn [x]
(vector (-> x butlast vec)
(last x))))
(apply sorted-map))
;=> {[0 1] "a", [1 1] "a"}

All subsets of a set in clojure

I wish to generate all subsets of a set except empty set
ie
(all-subsets #{1 2 3}) => #{#{1},#{2},#{3},#{1,2},#{2,3},#{3,1},#{1,2,3}}
How can this be done in clojure?
In your :dependencies in project.clj:
[org.clojure/math.combinatorics "0.0.7"]
At the REPL:
(require '[clojure.math.combinatorics :as combinatorics])
(->> #{1 2 3}
(combinatorics/subsets)
(remove empty?)
(map set)
(set))
;= #{#{1} #{2} #{3} #{1 2} #{1 3} #{2 3} #{1 2 3}}
clojure.math.combinatorics/subsets sensibly returns a seq of seqs, hence the extra transformations to match your desired output.
Here's a concise, tail-recursive version with dependencies only on clojure.core.
(defn power [s]
(loop [[f & r] (seq s) p '(())]
(if f (recur r (concat p (map (partial cons f) p)))
p)))
If you want the results in a set of sets, use the following.
(defn power-set [s] (set (map set (power s))))
#zcaudate: For completeness, here is a recursive implementation:
(defn subsets
[s]
(if (empty? s)
#{#{}}
(let [ts (subsets (rest s))]
(->> ts
(map #(conj % (first s)))
(clojure.set/union ts)))))
;; (subsets #{1 2 3})
;; => #{#{} #{1} #{2} #{3} #{1 2} #{1 3} #{2 3} #{1 2 3}} (which is correct).
This is a slight variation of #Brent M. Spell's solution in order to seek enlightenment on performance consideration in idiomatic Clojure.
I just wonder if having the construction of the subset in the loop instead of another iteration through (map set ...) would save some overhead, especially, when the set is very large?
(defn power [s]
(set (loop [[f & r] (seq s) p '(#{})]
(if f (recur r (concat p (map #(conj % f) p)))
p))))
(power [1 2 3])
;; => #{#{} #{3} #{2} #{1} #{1 3 2} #{1 3} #{1 2} #{3 2}}
It seems to me loop and recuris not lazy.
It would be nice to have a lazy evaluation version like Brent's, to keep the expression elegancy, while using laziness to achieve efficiency at the sametime.
This version as a framework has another advantage to easily support pruning of candidates for subsets, when there are too many subsets to compute. One can add the logic of pruning at position of conj. I used it to implement the prior algorithm for "Frequent Item Set".
refer to: Algorithm to return all combinations of k elements from n
(defn comb [k l]
(if (= 1 k) (map vector l)
(apply concat
(map-indexed
#(map (fn [x] (conj x %2))
(comb (dec k) (drop (inc %1) l)))
l))))
(defn all-subsets [s]
(apply concat
(for [x (range 1 (inc (count s)))]
(map #(into #{} %) (comb x s)))))
; (all-subsets #{1 2 3})
; (#{1} #{2} #{3} #{1 2} #{1 3} #{2 3} #{1 2 3})
This version is loosely modeled after the ES5 version on Rosetta Code. I know this question seems reasonably solved already... but here you go, anyways.
(fn [s]
(reduce
(fn [a b] (clojure.set/union a
(set (map (fn [y] (clojure.set/union #{b} y)) a))))
#{#{}} s))