I've obfuscated this code.
Why does this work:
(let [
items [{:var1 x, :var2 x, :var3 (:something x), :var4 (:something2 x)}]
;..........
(my-func items) ; ok
whereas this produces an exception:
(let [
items (map (fn [x] ({:var1 x, :var2 x, :var3 (:something x), :var4 (:something2 x)})) (db/get-items-from-db))
;..........
(my-func items) ; error
which is
Wrong number of args (0) passed to: PersistentArrayMap
When we strip it down to the bones, we have this:
(map (fn [x] ({:a x :b (:c x)})) '({:c "abc"}))
Which produces your error.
The problem is that there are parentheses around the map definition, thus, the map is being treated as a function, and there are no arguments given to it in this case. Remove the parens, and it works:
(map (fn [x] {:a x :b (:c x)}) '({:c "abc"}))
;; ({:a {:c "abc"}, :b "abc"})
It would be the same error as trying to do this:
(defn func [x]
({:a x :b (:c x)}))
When in fact you want:
(defn func [x]
{:a x :b (:c x)})
It may help to further understand if we remember that a map may be used as a function, with the argument specifying which key's value to return:
({:a 1 :b 2} :b)
;; 2
though we often do the reverse and use the key as the function:
(:b {:a 1 :b 2})
;; 2
So we could also remove the error by specifying an argument (in this case :b) to the map being created, though it would not produce the implied desired result:
(map (fn [x] ({:a x :b (:c x)} :b)) '({:c "abc"}))
;; ("abc")
Related
I am given a list maps:
({:a 1 :b ["red" "blue"]} {:a 2 :b ["green"]} {:a 1 :b ["yellow"]} {:a 2 :b ["orange"]})
and I need to combine them to ultimately look like this:
({:a 1 :b ["red" "blue" "yellow"]} {:a 2 :b ["green" "orange"]})
Where the maps are combined based off the value of the key "a".
So far, I have this
(->> (sort-by :a)
(partition-by :a)
(map (partial apply merge)))
But the merge will overwrite the vector in "b" with the last one giving me
({:a 1 :b ["yellow"]} {:a 2 :b ["orange"]})
Instead of merge, use merge-with, i.e.
(->> a (sort-by :a)
(partition-by :a)
(map (partial
apply
merge-with (fn [x y] (if (= x y) x (into x y))))))
Outputs
({:a 1, :b ["red" "blue" "yellow"]} {:a 2, :b ["green" "orange"]})
You don't really want to sort or partition anything: that is just CPU time spent on nothing, and at the end you have an awkward data structure (a list of maps) instead of something that would be more convenient, a map keyed by the "important" :a value.
Rather, I would write this as a reduce, where each step uses merge-with on the appropriate subsection of the eventual map:
(defn combine-by [k ms]
(reduce (fn [acc m]
(update acc (get m k)
(partial merge-with into)
(dissoc m k)))
{}, ms))
after which we have
user=> (combine-by :a '({:a 1 :b ["red" "blue"]}
{:a 2 :b ["green"]}
{:a 1 :b ["yellow"]}
{:a 2 :b ["orange"]}))
{1 {:b ["red" "blue" "yellow"]}, 2 {:b ["green" "orange"]}}
which is usefully keyed for easily looking up a map by a specific :a, or if you prefer to get the results back out as a list, you can easily unroll it.
This makes sense:
user=> (into {} [[:a 1] [:b 2]])
{:a 1, :b 2}
But why does this generate an error?
user=> (into {} (partition 2 [:a 1 :b 2]))
ClassCastException clojure.lang.Keyword cannot be cast to java.util.Map$Entry clojure.lang.ATransientMap.conj (ATransientMap.java:44)
Just to be sure:
user=> (partition 2 [:a 1 :b 2])
((:a 1) (:b 2))
Does into have a problem with lazy sequences? If so, why?
Beyond an explanation of why this doesn't work, what is the recommended way to conj a sequence of key-value pairs like [:a 1 :b 2] into a map? (apply conj doesn't seem to work, either.)
You can apply the sequence to assoc:
(apply assoc {:foo 1} [:a 1 :b 2])
=> {:foo 1, :a 1, :b 2}
Does into have a problem with lazy sequences? If so, why?
No, into is commonly used with lazily evaluated sequences. This is lazy, but each key/value tuple is a vector, which is why it works when into is reducing the pairs into the map:
(into {} (map vector (range 3) (repeat :x)))
=> {0 :x, 1 :x, 2 :x}
This doesn't work because the key/value pairs are lists:
(into {} (map list (range 3) (repeat :x)))
So the difference isn't laziness; it's due to into using reduce using conj on the map, which only works with vector key/value pairs (or MapEntrys):
(conj {} [:a 1]) ;; ok
(conj {} (MapEntry. :a 1)) ;; ok
(conj {} '(:a 1)) ;; not ok
Update: assoc wrapper for applying empty/nil sequences as suggested in comments:
(defn assoc*
([m] m)
([m k v & kvs]
(apply assoc m k v kvs)))
The recommended way – (assuming the seq arg is non-empty, as pointed out by the OP) – would be
Clojure 1.9.0
user=> (apply assoc {} [:a 1 :b 2])
{:a 1, :b 2}
The version with partition doesn't work because the blocks that partition returns are seqs and those are not treated as map entries when conj'd on to a map the way vectors and actual map entries are.
E.g. (into {} (map vec) (partition 2 [:a 1 :b 2])) would work because here the pairs get converted to vectors before conjing.
Still the approach with assoc is preferable unless there's some particular circumstance that makes into convenient (like, say, if you have a bunch of transducers that you want to use for preprocessing your partition-generated pairs etc.).
Clojure treats a 2-vec such as [:a 1] as equivalent to a MapEntry, doing what amounts to "automatic type conversion". I try to avoid this and always be explicit.
(first {:a 1}) => <#clojure.lang.MapEntry [:a 1]>
(conj {:a 1} [:b 2]) => <#clojure.lang.PersistentArrayMap {:a 1, :b 2}>
So we see that a MapEntry prints like a vector but has a different type (just like a Clojure seq prints like a list but has a different type). seq converts a Clojure map into a sequence of MapEntry's, and first gets us the first one (most Clojure functions call (seq ...) on any input collections before any other processing).
Notice that conj does the inverse type conversion, treating the vector [:b 2] as if it were a MapEntry. However, conj won't perform automatic type conversion for a list or a seq:
(throws? (conj {:a 1} '(:b 2)))
(throws? (into {:a 1} '(:b 2)))
into has the same problem since it is basically just (reduce conj <1st-arg> <2nd-seq>).
The other answers already have 3 ways that work:
(assoc {} :b 2) => {:b 2}
(conj {} [:b 2]) => {:b 2}
(into {} [[:a 1] [:b 2]]) => {:a 1, :b 2}
However, I would avoid those and stick to either hash-map or sorted-map, both of which avoid the problem of empty input seqs:
(apply hash-map []) => {} ; works for empty input seq
(apply hash-map [:a 1 :b 2]) => {:b 2, :a 1}
If your input sequence is a list of pairs, flatten is sometimes helpful:
(apply sorted-map (flatten [[:a 1] [:b 2]])) => {:a 1, :b 2}
(apply hash-map (flatten '((:a 1) (:b 2)))) => {:a 1, :b 2}
P.S.
Please be note that these are not the same:
java.util.Map$Entry (listed in jdk docs as "Map.Entry")
clojure.lang.MapEntry
P.P.S
If you already have a map and want to merge in a (possibly empty) sequence of key-value pairs, just use a combination of into and hash-map:
(into {:a 1} (apply hash-map [])) => {:a 1}
(into {:a 1} (apply hash-map [:b 2])) => {:a 1, :b 2}
Given a nested collection I would like to reduce it to only the k-v pairs which are the form [_ D] where D is an integer. For instance I would like to transform as follows:
; Start with this ...
{:a {:val 1 :val 2} :b {:val 3 :c {:val 4}} :val 5}
; ... end with this
{:val 1, :val 2, :val 3, :val 4, :val 5}
I have written a function using postwalk as follows:
(defn mindwave-values [data]
(let [values (atom {})
integer-walk (fn [x]
(if (map? x)
(doseq [[k v] x]
(if (integer? v) (swap! values assoc k v)))
x))]
(postwalk integer-walk data)
#values))
I am curious if it is possible to do this without using mutable state?
EDIT The original function was not quite correct.
Your example data structure is not a legal map, so I've changed it a bit:
(defn int-vals [x]
(cond (map? x) (mapcat int-vals x)
(coll? x) (when (= 2 (count x))
(if (integer? (second x))
[x]
(int-vals (second x))))))
user> (int-vals {:a {:x 1 :y 2} :b {:val 3 :c {:val 4}} :val 5})
([:y 2] [:x 1] [:val 4] [:val 3] [:val 5])
Your requirements are a bit vague: you say "collection", but your example contains only maps, so I've just had to guess at what you intended.
I'm trying to come up with some way for the values in a clojure hashmap to refer to each other. Conceptually, something like this:
(def m {:a 1 :b 5 :c (+ (:a m) (:b m))} ;Implies (= (:c m) 6)
This doesn't work, of course since I'm circularly referencing m. I can do something like
(def m {:a 1 :b 5 :c (fn [a b] (+ a b))})
((:c m) (:a m) (:b m)) ;=> 6
but that doesn't really gain anything because I still have to know which a and b to put into the function. Another attempt:
(def m {:a 1 :b 5 :c (fn [m] (+ (:a m) (:b m)))})
((:c m) m) ;=> 6
It's a bit better since I've now internalized the function to a map though not specifically this map. I might try to fix that with something like this
(defn new-get [k m]
(let [v-or-fn (get m k)]
(if (fn? v-or-fn) (v-or-fn m) v-or-fn)))
(def m {:a 1 :b 5 :c (fn [m] (+ (:a m) (:b m)))})
(new-get :a m) ;=> 1
(new-get :b m) ;=> 5
(new-get :c m) ;=> 6
I think this is about the best I can do. Am I missing something more clever?
Couldn't help myself from writing a macro:
(defmacro defmap [name m]
(let [mm (into [] (map (fn [[k v]] `[~k (fn [~name] ~v)]) m))]
`(def ~name
(loop [result# {} mp# (seq ~mm)]
(if (seq mp#)
(let [[k# v#] (first mp#)]
(recur (assoc result# k# (v# result#)) (rest mp#)))
result#)))))
(defmap m [[:a 1]
[:b 5]
[:c (+ (:a m) (:b m))]])
;; m is {:a 1 :b 5 :c 6}
As I've already said in comment above you can use let form:
(def m
(let [a 1 b 5]
{:a a :b b :c (+ a b)}))
This should be fine if you're using values that known only inside m definition. Otherwise you would better to use function parameters as #Michiel shown.
P.S. by the way you're free to use everything inside def you're usually use in clojure. Moreover, sometimes you're free to use let in sugared form inside some other forms (although this let uses different mechanisms than usual let form):
(for [x (...) xs]
:let [y (+ x 1)]
; ...
Since c is a derived value, so a function, of a and b you're probably better of by defining a function that produces this map:
(defn my-map-fn [a b]
{:a a :b b :c (+ a b)})
(def my-map (my-map-fn 1 2))
(:c my-map) ;;=> 3
Here is my take on it:
(defmacro let-map [& bindings]
(let [symbol-keys (->> bindings (partition 2) (map first))]
`(let [~#bindings]
(into {} ~(mapv (fn [k] [(keyword k) k]) symbol-keys)))))
;; if you view it as similar to let, when it's more complicated:
(let-map
a 1
b 5
c (+ a b)) ; => {:a 1, :b 5, :c 6}
;; if you see it as an augmented hash-map, when it's simple enough:
(let-map a 1, b 5, c (+ a b)) ; => {:a 1, :b 5, :c 6}
Is there a cleaner way to do something like the following in clojure?
(defn this [x] (* 2 x))
(defn that [x] (inc x))
(defn the-other [x] (-> x this that))
(defn make-vector [thing]
(let [base (vector (this (:a thing))
(that (:b thing)))]
(if-let [optional (:c thing)]
(conj base (the-other optional))
base)))
(make-vector {:a 1, :b 2}) ;=> [2 3]
(make-vector {:a 1, :b 2, :c 3}) ;=> [2 3 7]
By "cleaner" I mean something closer to this:
(defn non-working-make-vector [thing]
(vector (this (:a thing))
(that (:b thing))
(if (:c thing) (the-other (:c thing)))))
(non-working-make-vector {:a 1, :b 2} ;=> [2 3 nil] no nil, please!
(non-working-make-vector {:a 1, :b 2, :c 3} ;=> [2 3 7]
Note that I might want to call some arbitrary function (e.g. this, that, the-other) on any of the keys in thing and place the result in the returned vector. The important thing is that if the key doesn't exist in the map it should not put a nil in the vector.
This is similar to this question but the output is a vector rather than a map so I can't use merge.
(defn this [x] (* 2 x))
(defn that [x] (inc x))
(defn the-other [x] (-> x this that))
(def k-f-map {:a this
:b that
:c the-other})
(def m1 {:a 1 :b 2})
(def m2 {:a 1 :b 2 :c 3})
(defn make-vector [k-f-map m]
(reduce (fn [res [fk fv]]
(if (fk m)
(conj res (fv (fk m)))
res))
[] k-f-map))
(make-vector k-f-map m1)
-> [2 3]
(make-vector k-f-map m2)
-> [2 3 7]
;;; replace [:a :b :c] with a vector of arbitrary functions
;;; of your choice, or perhaps accept a seqable of functions
;;; as an extra argument
(defn make-vector [thing]
(into [] (keep #(% thing) [:a :b :c])))
;;; from the REPL:
(make-vector {:a 1 :b 2})
; => [1 2]
(make-vector {:a 1 :b 2 :c 3})
; => [1 2 3]
Note that keep only throws out nil; false will be included in the output.
or using cond->?
your make-vector function in cond-> version:
(defn make-vector [thing]
(cond-> [(this (:a thing))
(that (:b thing))]
(:c thing) (conj (the-other (:c thing)))))
you can have more conditions or change :a and :b to be optional as well.