I have the following function (from the Real World Ocaml book) that works perfectly (with the Core library):
let upcase_first_entry line =
match String.split ~on:',' line with
| [] -> assert false
| first :: rest -> String.concat ~sep: "," (String.uppercase first :: rest);;
So when i evaluate:
upcase_first_entry ("one,two");;
I get:
- : string = "ONE,two"
From my understanding of the function, the string is first transform into a list of string and then the uppercase function is applied and finally the output is transformed back to a string.
So I tried the following function:
List.map ~f:(fun (first :: last) -> (String.uppercase first :: last)) ["one","two"];;
where I pass to the function the list directly. But I get the following error:
Error: This pattern matches values of type 'a list
but a pattern was expected which matches values of type
string * string
Can someone guide me as to why this is throwing an error ?
Typing the argument ["one", "two"] directly into the interpreter gives
- : (string * string) list = [("one", "two")]
That is, a list of pairs of strings not a list of strings. You probably meant to type ["one"; "two"] which is a string list. In OCaml, the , is used for making pairs and other tuples, even if the parentheses are not given.
The next problem is that List.map applies a function to each element of the list and creates a new list. In this situation, it expects an f that maps a string to something. But your anonymous function maps a list of strings to a list of strings (string list -> string list).
In this case, the simplest solution is probably not to use List.map and to simply apply your function to the argument.
(fun (first :: last) -> (String.uppercase first :: last)) ["one";"two"]
The resulting warning indicates that a case is missing. Indeed, the anonymous function is not defined for the empty list. This does not matter for the given argument, but, in general, it would be better to define what should happen, and it gets rid of the warning:
(function (first :: last) -> (String.uppercase first :: last) | [] -> []) ["one";"two"]
Related
Some functions in the List module fail when the argument is an empty list. List.rev is an example. The problem is the dreaded Value Restriction.
I met the same problem while trying to define a function that returns a list with all but the last element of a list:
let takeAllButLast (xs: 'a list) =
xs |> List.take (xs.Length - 1)
The function works well with nonempty lists, but a version that would handle empty lists fails:
let takeAllButLast (xs: 'a list) =
if List.isEmpty xs then []
else xs |> List.take (xs.Length - 1)
takeAllButLast []
error FS0030: Value restriction. The value 'it' has been inferred to have generic type
val it : '_a list, etc.
I tried several things: making it an inline function, not specifying a type for the argument, specifying a type for the returned value, making the function depend on a type argument, and using the Option type to obtain an intermediate result later converted to list<'a>. Nothing worked.
For example, this function has the same problem:
let takeAllButLast<'a> (xs: 'a list) =
let empty : 'a list = []
if List.isEmpty xs then empty
else xs |> List.take (xs.Length - 1)
A similar question was asked before in SO: F# value restriction in empty list but the only answer also fails when the argument is an empty list.
Is there a way to write a function that handles both empty and nonempty lists?
Note: The question is not specific to a function that returns all but the last element of a list.
The function itself is completely fine. The function does not "fail".
You do not need to modify the body of the function. It is correct.
The problem is only with the way you're trying to call the function: takeAllButLast []. Here, the compiler doesn't know what type the result should have. Should it be string list? Or should it be int list? Maybe bool list? No way for the compiler to know. So it complains.
In order to compile such call, you need to help the compiler out: just tell it what type you expect to get. This can be done either from context:
// The compiler gleans the result type from the type of receiving variable `l`
let l: int list = takeAllButLast []
// Here, the compiler gleans the type from what function `f` expects:
let f (l: int list) = printfn "The list: %A" l
f (takeAllButLast [])
Or you can declare the type of the call expression directly:
(takeAllButLast [] : int list)
Or you can declare the type of the function, and then call it:
(takeAllButLast : int list -> int list) []
You can also do this in two steps:
let takeAllButLast_Int : int list -> int list = takeAllButLast
takeAllButLast_Int []
In every case the principle is the same: the compiler needs to know from somewhere what type you expect here.
Alternatively, you can give it a name and make that name generic:
let x<'a> = takeAllButLast [] : 'a list
Such value can be accessed as if it was a regular value, but behind the scenes it is compiled as a parameterless generic function, which means that every access to it will result in execution of its body. This is how List.empty and similar "generic values" are implemented in the standard library.
But of course, if you try to evaluate such value in F# interactive, you'll face the very same gotcha again - the type must be known - and you'll have to work around it anyway:
> x // value restriction
> (x : int list) // works
First of all I usually programming in imperative languaes, that makes me hard to explain certain things. First of all is functions without args, and return types. Example is function that flattens a list:
# let rec flat = function
[] -> []
| h :: t -> h # flat t;;
val flat : 'a list list -> 'a list = <fun>
How OCaml interpreter know that:
My function flat need exactly one argument which is "list of lists".
Flat returns type is a list. Do the interpreter checks it with [] -> [] line?
let rec flat = function
[] -> []
| h :: t -> h # flat t;;
You used function keyword. function is a shortcut for match ... with. So the function you wrote is exactly like
let rec flat l =
match l with
[] -> []
| h :: t -> h # flat t
That's why ocaml knows your function has one parameter
Your function is recursive. [] -> [] is the basic case and it is also where the function will be stopped. And yes, interpreter checks it with [] -> [].
Furthermore, a function must have at least a unit parameter which is () or a normal parameter. If a function does not have anything, it is not a function, instead, it is a variable with a fixed value.
Let's have an example:
let f1 = Random.int 10;
f1 does not have any parameter, even without a () (here () is just like a method in Java without any parameter). Then f1 is a constant value which was generated by the Random. No matter when you call it, f1 will always be fixed.
let f2 () = Random.int 10;
f2 is a function. And each time you call f2(), the Random inside will generate a random in and returns it.
let rec flat = function
[] -> []
| h :: t -> h # flat t;;
Let's go through this a step at a time. The function keyword, as you might expect, gives a function. The basic syntax is function | pat1 -> branch1 | pat2 -> branch2, and what you get is a function of one argument that tries to match that argument against each pattern in turn, and for the first pattern that matches the result is the corresponding branch.
So that's how we know flat is a function. Moreover, we can see that its one argument is matched against [], which is a list. So flat must be a function that takes a list. We see that if the input is [] then the output is [], so it's a function that takes a list and returns a list.
Now let's look at that second pattern. h :: t is a pattern that matches a list and creates two new variable bindings: h is the first element of the list and t is all the rest of the elements. In particular, h has whatever type the elements of the input list have.
If you look at what happens if this pattern match succeeds, h # flat t, we see the list concatenation operator # applied to h and flat t. This means that h must be a list, and must be the same kind of list as flat t. So the elements of the input list are lists, and so is the output of the function.
This gives you flat : 'a list list -> 'a list.
To answer your questions directly, flat needs exactly one argument because it is defined with the function keyword and the return values of the branches are values and not functions (if the function branches were also functions, that would meant flat could have two or more arguments). It is a list because the pattern match is against list constructors, and it is a list of lists because h is an element of the list and is used with the # operator, which requires its arguments to be lists, so the elements of the list are lists.
There are actually three reasons why the return type must be a list:
In the first branch, a list [] is returned.
In the second branch, the result of # is returned, and # returns lists
Also in the second branch, flat t is called recursively, and then given as an argument to #. Since it is an argument to #, it must be a list, and so flat must return a list.
The third bullet point is especially interesting, because it shows you that it's not just how you create values that determines their type, but how you use them as well.
I have a list of lists like so:
[["BBBBBBBB",
"BWFFFPFGB",
"BWFFFPFGB",
"BWFFMPFGB",
"BWFFFPF_B",
"BWFFFPF6B",
"BBBBBBB"]]
I've done a little research and have found out how to access individual elements using the !! operator. But when it comes to searching for a certain element 'M' I'm not sure how to go about that. My friend said I need to use something like (x:xs):xss on a list, but when I try this in the WinGHCi haskell program I get this.
Prelude> let list = [["BBBBBBBB",
"BWFFFPFGB",
"BWFFFPFGB",
"BWFFMPFGB",
"BWFFFPF_B",
"BWFFFPF6B",
"BBBBBBB"]]
Prelude> head(x:xs):xss
<interactive>:192:2: Not in scope: `x'
<interactive>:192:4: Not in scope: `xs'
<interactive>:192:8: Not in scope: `xss'
I understand that I declare the name as list and not x:xs but even when I declare it as x:xs I still get the errors. I'm probably still a little new to haskell to really understand what to do so I may be going about this way wrong.
I've looked here Replace individual list elements in Haskell? because eventually I want to replace the M with something different but I'm not completely sure how I would implement that.
Any help/guidance is appreciated, thanks!
First let's see how to replace a W with M
charWM :: Char -> Char
charWM 'W' = 'M' -- If you see W, put M.
charWM x = x -- If you see anything else, put it back as is.
You can rewrite that function how you like by adding other letter transformations.
Now let's make that work over a list. There's a great function map :: (a ->b) -> [a] -> [b] that lets you apply a function on every element on a list.
stringWM :: String -> String
stringWM xs = map charWM xs -- do charWM to everything in xs.
For example stringWM "QWERTY WILL WIN" = "QMERTY MILL MIN"
Next we can do that to a list of lists:
lolWM :: [String] -> [String]
lolWM xss = map stringWM xss
(String is a type synonym for [Char].)
Let's test that out in ghci:
*Main> list'
["BBBBBBBB","BWFFFPFGB","BWFFFPFGB","BWFFMPFGB","BWFFFPF_B","BWFFFPF6B","BBBBBBB"]
*Main> lolWM list'
["BBBBBBBB","BMFFFPFGB","BMFFFPFGB","BMFFMPFGB","BMFFFPF_B","BMFFFPF6B","BBBBBBB"]
All good.
Your example wasn't exactly list', it was [list'] which has 1 element, so to work on that we'd need to map lolWM. Often we wouldn't bother writing stringWM or lolWM and go directly to lists of lists of lists, if that's what we needed:
lololWM = (map.map.map) charWM
map.map.map means map the map of the map. You can allow that to blow your mind a little, or you can just say list of list of list of Char, so map map map - one map per list level.
In the future, maybe you'll want to replace W with Strings instead of characters.
rewriteChar :: Char -> String
rewriteChar 'W' = "--^--"
rewriteChar x = [x] -- put x in a list to make it a string
This time, map isn't enough: map rewriteChar "QWERTY WILL WIN" gives
["Q","--^--","E","R","T","Y"," ","--^--","I","L","L"," ","--^--","I","N"]
We could use concat on that to flatten it into a single list, but it's more fun to do
rewriteString = concatMap rewriteChar
So now rewriteString "QWERTY WILL WIN" give us "Q--^--ERTY --^--ILL --^--IN".
For more mindblowing things to try, there's "QWERTY WILL WIN" >>= rewriteChar and "Hello Mum" >>= \x -> [x,x,x]
First of all, virtually all "variables" in Haskell are immutable, so there's no "changing a list", there are modified copies.
Second, you need to find an element by some criteria. To do that, you need to traverse a list. - This can be done using recursion. Filtering can be done using a function passed as an argument of your traversing function (this function must take an element and return a boolean value).
Try to put the above together and make your own function. Start with a type signature, it shows what you want to do: to take a list of Char (it's better to generalize to a generic type) and a function which possibly changes an element and return a modified list:
replaceFunc :: (Char -> Char) -> String -> String
Also, read http://www.haskell.org/haskellwiki/How_to_work_on_lists , there's a hint there how to apply some function to specific elements only.
I'm trying to extract the given elements from a list, but I get an Match exception?
The goal is to make my function behave like:
fun extract [#"a",#"b",#"c"] [0,1,0] = [#"a",#"b",#"a"];
And I'm trying to do it like this:
fun extract [] _ = []
| extract xr (y::yr) = List.nth(xr, y) :: extract xr yr;
But as said, I get an
! Uncaught exception:
! Match
Any ideas?
Maybe theres some more List functions I could use for this?
I've head about the curry function, which should make a function into a higher-order function, but I don't really know how that works?
The reason that you get a match error is that there's no case for when the second list is empty, but the first is not (which will always happen unless the first list is empty to begin with because only the second list gets shorter).
Basically you can change the first line to fun extract _ [] = [] and it will work.
And yes, you can also solve this using higher-order function. You can use curry to turn List.nth into a function of type 'a list -> int -> 'a instead of 'a list * int -> 'a. You can then partially apply that function to xr, which turns it into a function of type int -> 'a, which will return the ith list of xr when given a number i. You can then use List.map to apply the function to each number in the list of indices you're given. So the function becomes:
fun extract xr yr = List.map (curry List.nth xr) yr
But what you came up with works fine, so you should just stick with that.
How to declare a function suffixsen : string list -> string list ?
After declaring types inside the parens, declare the function's return type on the outside with :return-type. At least in SMLnj. I found this through trial and error, can't find documentation for it.
fun suffixson (xs: string list ): string list =
map (fn x => x ^ "son") xs
The syntax to define a function with one argument in sml is:
fun functionName argumentName = functionBody
or
fun functionName (argumentName : argumentType) = functionBody
if you want to specify the type explicitly. So to define a function named suffixsen of type string list -> string list, you can do:
fun suffixsen (strings : string list) = someExpressionThatReturnsAStringList
Edit in response to you comment:
In order to append "son" to each string in the list, you should look at the ^ operator[1], which concatenates string, and the map function which performs an operation for each element in a list.
[1] http://www.standardml.org/Basis/string.html#SIG:STRING.^:VAL (copy and paste this link in your browser - for some reason I can't get this to be clickable)