SML Match Redundant Error - sml

Im writing some code for an insertion sort in SML. Here it is.
fun compare(x:real, y:real, F) = F(x, y);
fun isEqual(x:real, y:real) = ((x <= y) andalso (x >= y));
fun rinsert(x: real, L: real list, F) = [x]
|rinsert(x, (y::ys), F) =
if isEqual(x, y) then rinsert (x, ys, F)
else if compare(x, y, F) then x::y::ys
else y::(rinsert (x, ys, F));
fun rinsort(L : real list, F) = []
|rinsort(x::xs, F) = rinsert(x, (rinsort (xs, F), F);
For whatever reason i keep coming up with this error
- val compare = fn : real * real * (real * real -> 'a) -> 'a
val isEqual = fn : real * real -> bool
stdIn:4.6-8.42 Error: match redundant
(x,L,F) => ...
--> (x,y :: ys,F) => ...
I understand what it's saying, that I've got a repetitive line somewhere, but I'm not sure where the problem could be.

The first line of rinsert has plain variables for each argument, so matches everything. Consequently, the second case is never reached. Same for rinsort.
To fix this, you'll need to replace the L parameter in both with the pattern [] for the empty list.

Related

SML only accepting int list when it should be a real list

I am trying to write a simple add function that takes two real lists and adds the matching indices together and generates a real list, but for some reason I can't get it to accept real lists as the parameters, but instead only int lists.
fun add (nil, _) = nil
| add (_, nil) = nil
| add (a :: b, x :: y) = (a + x) :: add (b,y)
When I try running my test input, val addTest = add([1.0, 2.0, 3.0], [0.1, 0.2, 0.3]); it gives me:
Error: operator and operand do not agree [tycon mismatch]
operator domain: int list * int list
operand: real list * real list
And I am just curious as to why SML is defaulting to an int list even though the "+" operand is used for both reals and ints. Shouldn't it be accepting `a list instead of just int lists?
Yes, + (along with other arithmetic operators) is overloaded but not parametrically polymorphic.
So you can do 1.0 + 1.0 and 1 + 1 and they give a real and an int respectively.
But fun f x y = x + y can infer to either, so the compiler defaults to the int overload.
As an addition to your own answer, you can do with a single : real in your code:
fun add ([], _) = []
| add (_, []) = []
| add (x::xs, y::ys) = (x + y : real) :: add (xs, ys)
and it will infer that you must mean real in all the other places, too.
You could generalise this operation into one called zipWith:
- fun zipWith f [] _ = []
| zipWith f _ [] = []
| zipWith f (x::xs) (y::ys) = f (x, y) :: zipWith f xs ys
> val ('a, 'b, 'c) zipWith = fn :
('a * 'b -> 'c) -> 'a list -> 'b list -> 'c list
- val add = zipWith (op + : real * real -> real)
> val add = fn : real list -> real list -> real list
- add [1.0, 2.0, 3.0] [4.0, 5.0, 6.0];
> val it = [5.0, 7.0, 9.0] : real list
I found out that the default behavior for SML in a case like this is to default to int behavior, so if you have an operand that works for either reals or ints it will be evaluated as an int. As for the method above I was able to get my desired behavior by specifying the parameters in the tuple to be real lists like so:
fun add (nil, _) = nil
| add (_, nil) = nil
| add (a::b : real list, x::y : real list) = (a + x) :: add (b,y)

SMLNJ Insertion Sort Operator and Operand dont agree error

Im making an insertion sort code in SML, here it is
fun compare(x:real, y:real, F) = F(x, y);
fun isEqual(x:real, y:real) = ((x <= y) andalso (x >= y));
fun rinsert(x: real, [], F) = [x]
|rinsert(x, (y::ys), F) =
if isEqual(x, y) then rinsert (x, ys, F)
else if compare(x, y, F) then x::y::ys
else y::(rinsert (x, ys, F));
fun rinsort([], F) = []
|rinsort(x::xs, F) = rinsert(x, (rinsort(xs, F), F));
However, on running it i get this error
val isEqual = fn : real * real -> bool
val rinsert = fn : real * real list * (real * real -> bool) -> real list
stdIn:12.27-12.58 Error: operator and operand don't agree [tycon mismatch]
operator domain: real * real list * (real * real -> bool)
operand: 'Z * ('Y list * 'X)
in expression:
rinsert (x,(rinsort (<exp>,<exp>),F))
I understand that rinsort is calling rinsert incorrectly, but I'm not sure how to fix it.
If it can be useful, This is an example of how your code should work with areal list:
fun compare(x:real, y:real, F) = F x y;
fun isEqual(x:real, y:real) = ((x <= y) andalso (x >= y));
fun rinsert(x: real, [], F) = [x]
|rinsert(x, (y::ys), F) =
if isEqual(x, y) then rinsert (x, ys, F)
else if compare(x, y, F) then x::y::ys
else y::(rinsert (x, ys, F));
fun rinsort([], F) = []
|rinsort(x::xs, F) = rinsert(x, rinsort(xs, F), F);
val funcComp = fn r1 : real => fn r2 : real => if r1 < r2 then true else false;
val l : real list = [1.0, 3.8, 5.6, 3.8, 4.4, 5.6, 6.3, 5.5, 4.6, 8.1];
val b = rinsort(l, funcComp);
Some general feedback:
The function compare only serves the purpose to switch the order of the arguments of F, so you might as well just refer to F itself then.
The function isEqual is kind of bad. Since reals are not equality types in SML for a reason, try and avoid comparing them like that. It turns out, in order to sort reals, you only need <=, not =.
The function rinsert has strict : real type annotations that are unnecessary since your insertion sort, in taking the comparison operator F as a parameter, might as well be generic (polymorphic).
You might want to call the parameter F something more descriptive, like cmp, leq, or whatever reminds you of its purpose.
Here's an example of how one might also make an insertion sort function:
fun sort leq xs =
let fun insert (x, []) = [x]
| insert (x, y::ys) =
if leq (x, y)
then x::y::ys
else y::insert (x, ys)
in List.foldl insert [] xs
end
It has the type ('a * 'a -> bool) -> 'a list -> 'a list. This is comparable to e.g. SML/NJ's built-in ListMergeSort.sort. I've chosen sort to be curried since you might want to specialize it by partial function application, e.g.,
val realsort = sort (op <=) : real list -> real list
val stringsort = sort (op >) : string list -> string list
but I've let the embedded helper function insert to be uncurried since List.foldl takes a function with type ('a * 'b -> 'b), i.e., a tuple of (x, ys) and returns a modified ys with x inserted.
You may want to consider which properties that can test that your function does sort. One property could be that all list elements in the sorted list are in the order specified by the comparison operator leq.
fun sorted_prop _ [] = true
| sorted_prop _ [_] = true
| sorted_prop leq (x::y::xs) = leq (x, y) andalso sorted_prop leq (y::xs)
Another property could be that each element in the unsorted list exists in the sorted list. The latter property may be hard to test if you're not assuming x to have an equality type (''a). But you could do that in the test specifically.

Haskell infinite recursion in list comprehension

I am trying to define a function that accepts a point (x,y) as input, and returns an infinite list corresponding to recursively calling
P = (u^2 − v^2 + x, 2uv + y)
The initial values of u and v are both 0.
The first call would be
P = (0^2 - 0^2 + 1, 2(0)(0) + 2) = (1,2)
Then that resulting tuple (1,2) would be the next values for u and v, so then it would be
P = (1^2 - 2^2 + 1, 2(1)(2) + 2) = (-2,6)
and so on.
I'm trying to figure out how to code this in Haskell. This is what I have so far:
o :: Num a =>(a,a) -> [(a,a)]
o (x,y) = [(a,b)| (a,b)<- [p(x,y)(x,y)]]
where p(x,y)(u,v) = ((u^2)-(v^2)+x,(2*u*v)+y)
I'm really not sure how to make this work. Any help would be appreciated!
Let's first ignore the exact question you have, and focus on getting the loop working. What you want, essentially, is to have something that takes some initial value iv (namely, (0, 0) for (u, v)), and returns the list
f iv : f (f iv) : f (f (f iv)) : f (f (f (f iv))) : ...
for some function f (constructed from your p and (x, y)). Moreover, you want the result to reuse the previously computed elements of the list. If I would write a function myself that does this, it might looke like this (but maybe with some different names):
looper :: (a -> a) -> a -> [a]
looper f iv = one_result : more_results
where
one_result = f iv
more_results = looper f one_result
But, of course, I would first look if a function with that type exists. It does: it's called Data.List.iterate. The only thing it does wrong is the first element of the list will be iv, but that can be easily fixed by using tail (which is fine here: as long as your iteration function terminates, iterate will always generate an infinite list).
Let's now get back to your case. We established that it'll generally look like this:
o :: Num a => (a, a) -> [(a, a)]
o (x, y) = tail (iterate f iv)
where
f (u, v) = undefined
iv = undefined
As you indicated, the initial value of (u, v) is (0, 0), so that's what our definition of iv will be. f now has to call p with the (x, y) from o's argument and the (u, v) for that iteration:
o :: Num a => (a, a) -> [(a, a)]
o (x, y) = tail (iterate f iv)
where
f (u, v) = p (x, y) (u, v)
iv = (0, 0)
p = undefined
It's as simple as that: the (x, y) from o's definition is actually in scope in the where-clause. You could even decide to merge f and p, and end up with
o :: Num a => (a, a) -> [(a, a)]
o (x, y) = tail (iterate p iv)
where
iv = (0, 0)
p (u, v) = (u^2 - v^2 + x, 2 * u * v + y)
Also, may I suggest that you use Data.Complex for your application? This makes the constraints on a a bit stricter (you need RealFloat a, because of Num.signum), but in my opinion, it makes your code much easier to read:
import Data.Complex
import Data.List (iterate)
{- ... -}
o :: Num (Complex a) => Complex a -> [Complex a]
o c = tail (iterate p iv)
where
iv = 0 -- or "0 :+ 0", if you want to be explicit
p z = z^2 + c
You want:
To construct a list [(u, v)] with the head of this list equal (0, 0)
And then map this list with the function \(u, v) -> (u^2 - v^2 + x, 2 * u * v + y), appending results of this function to the list.
We can write this function as described:
func :: (Num t) => (t, t) -> [(t, t)]
func (x, y) = (0, 0) : map functionP (func (x, y))
where functionP (u, v) = (u^2 - v^2 + x, 2 * u * v + y)
GHCi > take 5 $ func (1, 2)
> [(0,0),(1,2),(-2,6),(-31,-22),(478,1366)]

Haskell Function that Takes A Pair of Values and a List

My homework has been driving me up the wall. I am supposed to write a function called myRepl that takes a pair of values and a list and returns a new list such that each occurrence of the first value of the pair in the list is replaced with the second value.
Example:
ghci> myRepl (2,8) [1,2,3,4]
> [1,8,3,4].
So far I have something like this (but its very rough and not working well at all. I need help with the algorithm:
myRep1 (x,y) (z:zs) =
if null zs then []
else (if x == z then y : myRep1 zs
else myRep1 zs )
I don't know how to create a function that takes a pair of values and a list. I'm not sure what the proper syntax is for that, and I'm not sure how to go about the algorithm.
Any help would be appreciated.
How about something like:
repl (x,y) xs = map (\i -> if i==x then y else i) xs
Explanation
map is a function that takes a function, applies it to each value in the list, and combines all the return values of that function into a new list.
The \i -> notation is a shortcut for writing the full function definition:
-- Look at value i - if it's the same as x, replace it with y, else do nothing
replacerFunc x y i = if x == y then y else i
then we can rewrite the repl function:
repl (x, y) xs = map (replacerFunc x y) xs
I'm afraid the map function you just have to know - it is relatively easy to see how it works. See the docs:
http://www.haskell.org/hoogle/?hoogle=map
How to write this without map? Now, a good rule of thumb is to get the base case of the recursion out of the way first:
myRep1 _ [] = ???
Now you need a special case if the list element is the one you want to replace. I would recommend a guard for this, as it reads much better than if:
myRep1 (x,y) (z:zs)
| x == z = ???
| otherwise = ???
As this is home work, I left a few blanks for you to fill in :-)
myRepl :: Eq a => (a, a) -> [a] -> [a]
myRepl _ [] = []
myRepl (v, r) (x : xs) | x == v = r : myRepl (v, r) xs
| otherwise = x : myRepl (v, r) xs
Untupled arguments, pointfree, in terms of map:
replaceOccs :: Eq a => a -> a -> [a] -> [a]
replaceOccs v r = map (\ x -> if x == v then r else x)

number_in_month exercise (Count elements in a list)

I have been trying to count elements in a list of integer 3-tuples, that equals a given integer using SML, but it's not working. Can anyone help me figure out what's wrong with the below code or straighten it up for me?
fun number_in_month(x : int*int*int list, m: int) =
if null x then 0
else
let fun inc x = x + 1;
in
val counter = 0;
if m = #2 (hd x) andalso m > 0 then inc counter
number_in_month((tl x), m)
` else
number_in_month((tl x), m)
end
This function is supposed to return the number of times m equals to the second element of each tuple in the list.
Clearly you have a hard time to let go of your imperative thinking.
Let me try and address some of your issues
You should be using pattern matching instead of using null x, hd x and tl x.
This also apply to decomposing tuples and records. For example
fun number_in_month ((x1, x2, x3) :: xs, m) = ...
or, since we don't ever use x1 and x3
fun number_in_month ((_, x2, _) :: xs, m) = ...
This way it is clearly seen that the first argument is a list of 3-tuples, and no type annotation
is needed
Also when you omit the explicit type annotation, which is the whole idea of having a type system
that can infer them for you (see next point), then this code
fun foo42 xs = map (fn x => #2 x) xs
will give you some nasty errors on "unresolved flex record" (this error message is from SML/NJ)
/tmp/sml20620PlF:105.5-105.44 Error: unresolved flex record
(can't tell what fields there are besides #2)
which is easily fixed by decomposing the 3-tuple
fun foo42 xs = map (fn (_, x2, _) => x2) xs
Speaking of type annotations. They are (almost always) not needed, and they clutter up the
readability of the code. Not to mention that they unnecessarily restricts the types you function
may be used on.
Also the type annotation you have given is erroneous according to what you really wan't. You
should have places parenthesis around the int * int * int. Currently it is interpreted as a
3-tuple of two ints and an int list int * int * (int list).
If you really insist in type annotating your function, then you can do it like this
val number_in_month : (int * int * int) list * int -> int =
fn ([] , m) => 0
| ((_,x2,_) :: xs, m) => 42
This is "almost" like Haskell, where the type is given just before the function declaration.
Try to be more consistent in they way you indent your code. That will give you better clarity.
Here I'm specifically thinking of the way you have indented the else part end the in ... end
part. The below part is clearly still erroneous in so many ways i can't begin to imagine, but it
gives an idea as how to do it
fun number_in_month(x : int*int*int list, m: int) =
if null x then 0
else
let fun inc x = x + 1;
in
val counter = 0;
if m = #2 (hd x) andalso m > 0 then
inc counter
number_in_month((tl x), m)
else
number_in_month((tl x), m)
end
You can't declare a variable val counter = 0 inside the in ... end part of a let-expression.
The semantics of a let-expression is
let
dec
in
exp_1; ...; exp_n
end
thus all declarations (function and value bindings, etc) must go in the let ... in part.
There is no need on earth to have an increment function, it just clutters the readability.
Remember that SML uses single assignment, thus variables are immutable after they are declared.
The sequence-thing inside your nested if-expression
inc counter
number_in_month((tl x), m)
makes absolutely no sense. The only way you can have more than one expression inside the
then ... else part (actually any place, where a single expression is expected), is with a
sequence (exp_1; ...; exp_n). However this is only usable when all but the last expression has
side effect(s), as their results is ignored/thrown away
- (print "Foo\n"; print "Bar\n"; 42);
Foo
Bar
val it = 42 : int
If you search a bit here on SO, you will see that a quite similar question has recently been asked and answered. Though it differs in the the type of the last argument, you might still get some useful pointers.
All in all a solution might look like
fun number_in_month ([], _) = 0
| number_in_month ((_,x2,_) :: xs, m) =
if x2 = m then
1 + number_in_month(xs, m)
else
number_in_month(xs, m)
However since your problem is simpler than the previously stated one, you could easily use some of the higher-order functions from the list module in the basis library
fun number_in_month (xs, m) = length (List.filter (fn (_, x2, _) => x2 = m) xs)
Or even (arguably) simpler, by folding over the list and incrementing a variable along the way each time it matches
fun number_in_month (xs, m) = foldl (fn ((_, x2, _), b) => if x2 = m then b+1 else b) 0 xs
fun number_in_month (L : (int*int*int) list, m : int) =
if L = nil
then 0
else
(if #2 (hd L) = m then 1 else 0) + number_in_month (tl L,m);
TESTING:
number_in_month ([] , 2);
number_in_month ([(1,2,3)] , 2);
number_in_month ([(1,2,3),(2,2,2)] , 2);
number_in_month ([(1,2,3),(2,2,2),(19,11,29)] , 2);
number_in_month ([(1,2,3),(2,2,2),(19,11,29),(10,28,19)] , 2);
number_in_month ([(1,2,3),(2,2,2),(19,11,29),(10,2,19)] , 2);
number_in_month ([(1,2,3),(2,2,2),(19,11,29),(10,28,19)] , 2);
number_in_month ([(1,2,3),(2,2,2),(19,11,29),(10,28,19)] , 2);
number_in_month ([(1,2,3),(2,2,2),(19,11,29),(10,28,19),(16,2,7)] , 2);
Reference:
http://www.cs.sunysb.edu/~leo/CSE215/smllistexamples.txt
http://www.standardml.org/Basis/list.html