I am trying to figure out how to implement the fold functions on inputs of differing types. As a sample, I'll use the count function for a list (though, I have multiple functions to implement for this).
Assuming an int list input (this should work with any type of list, though), my count function would be
val count = foldr (fn(x:int,y)=>y+1) 0 ;
val count = fn : int list -> int
However, I am attempting to make a count function where the type is
val count = fn : int list * bool list -> int
where the int list is the universe of the set, and the bool determines which values of the universe are in the set. ie, (1,3,5,6),(true,false,false,true) results in a final set of (1,6), which would have a count of 2. My first thought to try this was some form of
val count= foldr (fn(x:(int*bool),y)=>if #2x then y+1 else y ) 0 ;
but this results in a return type of
val count = fn : (int * bool) list -> int
which is not quite what I need. Logically, they are similar, but I am expected to group the two types together in one list each.
You could use ListPair.foldl:
fun count (xs, bs) = ListPair.foldl (fn (x, b, acc) => ...) ... (xs, bs)
where the first ... is some combination of x, b and acc and the second ... is the initial value.
This assumes that xs and bs are equally long, and in case they're not, discards the remaining elements in the longer list. (You should probably try to justify if this gives the correct answer in either case xs or bs is longer.)
Otherwise, you need to combine (aka zip) your int list × bool list into an (int × bool) list by making a function that combines two lists, and use this function in combination with the folding you are already doing.
fun combine (x::xs, y::ys) = ...
| combine (..., ...) = ...
This function could be equivalent to ListPair.zip.
Related
I'm trying to grapple my head around Haskell and I'm having a hard time pinning down the general procedure/algorithm for this specific task. What I want to do is basically give Haskell a list [1,2,3,5,6,9,16,17,18,19] and have it give me back [1-3, 5, 6, 9, 16-19] so essentially turning three or more consecutive numbers into a range in the style of lowestnumber - highestnumber. What I have issue with it I suppose is the all too common difficulty grappling with with the functional paradigm of Haskell. So I would really appreciate a general algorithm or an insight into how to view this from an "Haskellian" point of view.
Thanks in advance.
If I understand the question correctly, the idea is to break up the input lists in chunks, where a chunk is either a single input element or a range of at least three consecutive elements.
So, let's start by defining a datatype for representing such chunks:
data Chunk a = Single a | Range a a
As you can see, the type is parametric in the type of input elements.
Next, we define a function chunks to actually construct a list of chunks from a list of input elements. For this, we require the ability to compare input elements and to obtain the immediate consecutive for a given input element (that is, its successor). Hence, the type of the function reads
chunks :: (Eq a, Enum a) => [a] -> [Chunk a]
Implementation is relatively straightforward:
chunks = foldr go []
where
go x (Single y : Single z : cs) | y == succ x && z == succ y = Range x z : cs
go x (Range y z : cs) | y == succ x = Range x z : cs
go x cs = Single x : cs
We traverse the list from right to left, generating chunks as we go. We generate a range if an input element precedes its two immediate consecutive elements (the first case of the helper function go) or if it precedes a range that starts with its immediate consecutive (the second case). Otherwise, we generate a single element (the final case).
To arrange for pretty output, we declare applications of the type constructor Chunk to be instances of the class Show (given that the type of input elements is in Show):
instance Show a => Show (Chunk a) where
show (Single x ) = show x
show (Range x y) = show x ++ "-" ++ show y
Returning to the example from the question, we then have:
> chunks [1,2,3,5,6,9,16,17,18,19]
[1-3,5,6,9,16-19]
Unfortunately, things are slightly more complicated if we need to account for bounded element types; such types have a largest element for which succ is undefined:
> chunks [maxBound, 1, 2, 3] :: [Chunk Int]
*** Exception: Prelude.Enum.succ{Int}: tried to take `succ' of maxBound
This suggests that we should abstract from the specific approach for determining whether one elements succeeds another:
chunksBy :: (a -> a -> Bool) -> [a] -> [Chunk a]
chunksBy succeeds = foldr go []
where
go x (Single y : Single z : cs) | y `succeeds` x && z `succeeds` y =
Range x z : cs
go x (Range y z : cs) | y `succeeds` x = Range x z : cs
go x cs = Single x : cs
Now, the version of chunks that was given above, can be expressed in terms of chunksBy simply by writing
chunks :: (Eq a, Enum a) => [a] -> [Chunk a]
chunks = chunksBy (\y x -> y == succ x)
Moreover, we can now also implement a version for bounded input types as well:
chunks' :: (Eq a, Enum a, Bounded a) => [a] -> [Chunk a]
chunks' = chunksBy (\y x -> x /= maxBound && y == succ x)
That merrily gives us:
> chunks' [maxBound, 1, 2, 3] :: [Chunk Int]
[9223372036854775807,1-3]
First, all elements of a list must be of the same type. Your resulting list has two different types. Ranges (for what ever that means) and Ints. We should convert one single digit into a range with lowest and highest been the same.
Been said so, You should define the Range data type and fold your list of Int into a list of Range
data Range = Range {from :: Int , to :: Int}
intsToRange :: [Int] -> [Range]
intsToRange [] = []
intsToRange [x] = [Range x x]
intsToRange (x:y:xs) = ... -- hint: you can use and auxiliar acc which holds the lowest value and keep recursion till find a y - x differece greater than 1.
You can also use fold, etc... to get a very haskelly point of view
Use recursion. Recursion is a leap of faith. It is imagining you've already written your definition and so can ("recursively") call it on a sub-problem of your full problem, and combine the (recursively calculated) sub-result with the left-over part to get the full solution -- easy:
ranges xs = let (leftovers, subproblem) = split xs
subresult = ranges subproblem
result = combine leftovers subresult
in
result
where
split xs = ....
combine as rs = ....
Now, we know the type of rs in combine (i.e. subresult in ranges) -- it is what ranges returns:
ranges :: [a] -> rngs
So, how do we split our input list xs? The type-oriented design philosophy says, follow the type.
xs is a list [a] of as. This type has two cases: [] or x:ys with x :: a and ys :: [a]. So the easiest way to split a list into a smaller list and some leftover part is
split (x:xs) = (x, ys)
split [] = *error* "no way to do this" -- intentionally invalid code
Taking note of the last case, we'll have to tweak the overall design to take that into account. But first things first, what's the rngs type could be? Going by your example data, it's a list of rngs, naturally, rngs ~ [rng].
A rng type though, we have a considerable degree of freedom to make it to be whatever we want. The cases we have to account for are pairs and singletons:
data Rng a = Single a
| Pair a a
.... and now we need to fit the jagged pieces together into one picture.
Combining a number with a range which starts from consecutive number is obvious.
Combining a number with a single number will have two obvious cases, for whether those numbers are consecutive or not.
I think / hope you can proceed from here.
I have two strings
a :: [String]
a = ["A1","A2","B3","C3"]
and
b :: [String]
b = ["A1","B2","B3","D5"]
And I want to calculate the difference between two strings based on the first character and second character and combination of two characters.
If the combination of two elements are the same, it would be calculate as 1
The function I declared is
calcP :: [String] -> [String] -> (Int,[String])
calcP (x:xs) (y:ys) = (a,b)
where
a = 0 in
???
b = ????
I know that I should have a increment variable to count the correct element, and where I should put it in? For now I totally have no idea about how to do that, can anyone give me some hint??
The desired result would be
(2,["B2","D5"])
How should I do that?
I assume that the lists have the same size.
The differences between the two lists
Let's focus on the main part of the problem:
Prelude> a=["A1","A2","B3","C3"]
Prelude> b=["A1","B2","B3","D5"]
First, notice that the zip method zips two lists. If you use it on a and b, you get:
Prelude> zip a b
[("A1","A1"),("A2","B2"),("B3","B3"),("C3","D5")]
Ok. It's now time to compare the terms one to one. There are many ways to do it.
Filter
Prelude> filter(\(x,y)->x/=y)(zip a b)
[("A2","B2"),("C3","D5")]
The lambda function returns True if the elements of the pair are different (/= operator). Thus, the filter keeps only the pairs that don't match.
It's ok, but you have to do a little more job to keep only the second element of each pair.
Prelude> map(snd)(filter(\(x,y)->x/=y)(zip a b))
["B2","D5"]
map(snd) applies snd, which keeps only the second element of a pair, to every discordant pair.
Fold
A fold is more generic, and may be used to implement a filter. Let's see how:
Prelude> foldl(\l(x,y)->if x==y then l else l++[y])[](zip a b)
["B2","D5"]
The lambda function takes every pair (x,y) and compares the two elements. If they have the same value, the accumulator list remains the identical, but if the values are different, the accumulator list is augmented by the second element.
List comprehension
This is more compact, and should seem obvious to every Python programmer:
Prelude> [y|(x,y)<-zip a b, x/=y] -- in Python [y for (x,y) in zip(a,b) if x!= y]
["B2","D5"]
The number of elements
You want a pair with the number of elements and the elements themselves.
Fold
With a fold, it's easy but cumbersome: you will use a slightly more complicated accumulator, that stores simultaneously the differences (l) and the number of those differences (n).
Prelude> foldl(\(n,l)(x,y)->if x==y then (n,l) else (n+1,l++[y]))(0,[])$zip a b
(2,["B2","D5"])
Lambda
But you can use the fact that your output is redundant: you want a list preceeded by the length of that list. Why not apply a lambda that does the job?
Prelude> (\x->(length x,x))[1,2,3]
(3,[1,2,3])
With a list comprehension, it gives:
Prelude> (\x->(length x,x))[y|(x,y)<-zip a b, x/=y]
(2,["B2","D5"])
Bind operator
Finally, and for the fun, you don't need to build the lambda this way. You could do:
Prelude> ((,)=<<length)[y|(x,y)<-zip a b,x/=y]
(2,["B2","D5"])
What happens here? (,) is a operator that makes a pair from two elements:
Prelude> (,) 1 2
(1,2)
and ((,)=<<length) : 1. takes a list (technically a Foldable) and passes it to the length function; 2. the list and the length are then passed by =<< (the "bind" operator) to the (,) operator, hence the expected result.
Partial conclusion
"There is more than than one way to do it" (but it's not Perl!)
Haskell offers a lot of builtins functions and operators to handle this kind of basic manipulation.
What about doing it recursively? If two elements are the same, the first element of the resulting tuple is incremented; otherwise, the second element of the resulting tuple is appended by the mismatched element:
calcP :: [String] -> [String] -> (Int,[String])
calcP (x:xs) (y:ys)
| x == y = increment (calcP xs ys)
| otherwise = append y (calcP xs ys)
where
increment (count, results) = (count + 1, results)
append y (count, results) = (count, y:results)
calcP [] x = (0, x)
calcP x [] = (0, [])
a = ["A1","A2","B3","C3"]
b = ["A1","B2","B3","D5"]
main = print $ calcP a b
The printed result is (2,["B2","D5"])
Note, that
calcP [] x = (0, x)
calcP x [] = (0, [])
are needed to provide exhaustiveness for the pattern matching. In other words, you need to provide the case when one of the passed elements is an empty list. This also provides the following logic:
If the first list is greater than the second one on n elements, these n last elements are ignored.
If the second list is greater than the first one on n elements, these n last elements are appended to the second element of the resulting tuple.
I'd like to propose a very different method than the other folks: namely, compute a "summary statistic" for each pairing of elements between the two lists, and then combine the summaries into your desired result.
First some imports.
import Data.Monoid
import Data.Foldable
For us, the summary statistic is how many matches there are, together with the list of mismatches from the second argument:
type Statistic = (Sum Int, [String])
I've used Sum Int instead of Int to specify how statistics should be combined. (Other options here include Product Int, which would multiply together the values instead of adding them.) We can compute the summary of a single pairing quite simply:
summary :: String -> String -> Statistic
summary a b | a == b = (1, [ ])
| otherwise = (0, [b])
Combining the summaries for all the elements is just a fold:
calcP :: [String] -> [String] -> Statistic
calcP as bs = fold (zipWith summary as bs)
In ghci:
> calcP ["A1", "A2", "B3", "C3"] ["A1", "B2", "B3", "D5"]
(Sum {getSum = 2},["B2","D5"])
This general pattern (of processing elements one at a time into a Monoidal type) is frequently useful, and spotting where it's applicable can greatly simplify your code.
I have to iterate over 2 lists. One starts off as a list of empty sublists and the second one has the max length for each of the sublists that are in the first one.
Example; list1 = [[];[];[];]; list2 = [1;2;3]
I need to fill out the empty sublists in list1 ensuring that the length of the sublists never exceed the corresponding integer in list2. To that end, I wrote the following function, that given an element, elem and 2 two lists list and list, will fill out the sublists.
let mapfn elem list1 list2=
let d = ref 1 in
List.map2 (fun a b -> if ((List.length a) < b) && (!d=1)
then (incr d ; List.append a [elem])
else a )
list1 list2
;;
I can now call this function repeatedly on the elements of a list and get the final answer I need
This function works as expected. But I am little bothered by the need to use the int ref d.
Is there a better way for me to do this.
I always find it worthwhile to split the problem into byte-sized pieces that can be composed together to form a solution. You want to pad or truncate lists to a given length; this is easy to do in two steps, first pad, then truncate:
let all x = let rec xs = x :: xs in xs
let rec take n = function
| [] -> []
| _ when n = 0 -> []
| x :: xs -> x :: take (pred n) xs
all creates an infinite list by repeating a value, while take extracts the prefix sublist of at most the given length. With these two, padding and truncating is very straightforwad:
let pad_trim e n l = take n (l # all e)
(it might be a bit surprising that this actually works in a strict language like OCaml). With that defined, your required function is simply:
let mapfn elem list1 list2 = List.map2 (pad_trim elem) list2 list1
that is, taking the second list as a list of specified lengths, pad each of the lists in the first list to that length with the supplied padding element. For instance, mapfn 42 [[];[];[]] [1;2;3] gives [[42]; [42; 42]; [42; 42; 42]]. If this is not what you need, you can tweak the parts and their assembly to suit your requirements.
Are you looking for something like that?
let fill_list elem lengths =
let rec fill acc = function
| 0 -> acc
| n -> fill (elem :: acc) (n - 1) in
let accumulators = List.map (fun _ -> []) lengths in
List.map2 fill accumulators lengths
(* toplevel test *)
# let test = fill_list 42 [1; 3];;
val test : int list list = [[42]; [42; 42; 42]]
(I couldn't make sense of the first list of empty lists in your question, but I suspect it may be the accumulators for the tail-rec fill function.)
I have a function compute a list to boolean matrix where num_of_name: 'a list -> 'a -> int : return a position of element in a list.
1) I would like mat_of_dep_rel : 'a list -> bool array array.
My problem is that from the first List.iter it should take a list l and not an empty list []. But if I return l instead of [], it will give me a type: ('a * 'a list) list -> boolean array array. Which is not what I want.
I would like to know how can I return mat_of_dep_rel: 'a list -> bool array array?
let mat_of_dep_rel l =
let n = List.length l in
let m = Array.make_matrix n n false in
List.iter (fun (s, ss) ->
let i = num_of_name ss s in
List.iter (fun t ->
m.(i).( num_of_name ss t) <- true) ss) [];
m;;
2) I have another functions compute equivalence classes, to compute an equivalence class : check an element i if it has a path i -> j and j -> i or itself. I would like it return for me a type int list list. In this code I force the return type 'list list by put j in [j]. My question is:
Is it correct if I force like that? If not how can I return the type I want int list list.
let eq_class m i =
let mi = m.(i) in
let aux =
List.fold_right (fun j l ->
if j = i || mi.(j) && m.(j).(i) then
[j] :: l else l) in
aux [] [];;
Another function eq_classes compute a set of equivalence classes by collect all the equivalence class. I would like to use a list data structure more than using a set. But for the moment, I am not really understand about the code saying here.
Could you please explain for me? If I want to use a list data structure, how can I use it? What is a different between a list and a set data structure in OCaml? Advance/Disadvance of its?
let eq_classes m =
IntSet.fold (fun i l -> IntMap.add i (eq_class m i) l)
IntSet.empty IntMap.empty;;
3) My last question is that. After having all the equivalence classes I would like to sort them. I have another functions
let cmp m i j = if eq_class m i = eq_class m j then 0
else if m.(i).(j) then -1 else 1;;
let eq_classes_sort m l = List.sort (cmp m) l;;
for the last function I want it return for me bool array array -> int list list not bool array array -> int list -> int list
Thank you for your help.
There are quite many things wrong or obscure about your questions, but I'll try to answer as well as possible.
Question 1
You're apparently trying to transform the representation of a dependency graph from a list to a matrix. It does not make any kind of sense to have a dependency graph represented as 'a list (in fact, there is no interesting way to build a boolean matrix from an arbitrary list anyway) so you probably intended to use an (int * int) list of pairs, each pair (i,j) being a dependency i -> j.
If you instead have a ('a * 'a) list of arbitrary pairs, you can easily number the elements using your num_of_name function to turn it into the aforementioned (int * int) list.
Once you have this, you can easily construct a matrix :
let matrix_of_dependencies dependencies =
let n = List.fold_left (fun (i,j) acc -> max i (max j acc)) 0 dependencies in
let matrix = Array.make_matrix (n+1) (n+1) false in
List.iter (fun (i,j) -> matrix.(i).(j) <- true) dependencies ;
matrix
val matrix_of_dependencies : (int * int) list -> bool array array
You can also compute the parameter n outside the function and pass it in.
Question 2
An equivalence class is a set of elements that are all equivalent. A good representation for a set, in OCaml, would be a list (module List) or a set (module Set). A list-of-lists is not a valid representation for a set, so you have no reason to use one.
Your algorithm is obscure, since you're apparently performing a fold on an empty list, which will just return the initial value (an empty list). I assume that you intended to instead iterate over all entries in the matrix column.
let equivalence_class matrix element =
let column = matrix.(element) and set = ref [] in
Array.iteri begin fun element' dependency ->
if dependency then set := element' :: !set
end column ;
!set
val equivalence_class : bool array array -> int list
I only check for i -> j because, if your dependencies are indeed an equivalence relationship (reflexive, transitive, symmetrical), then i -> j implies j -> i. If your dependencies are not an equivalence relationship, then you are in fact looking for cycles in a graph representation of a relationship, which is an entirely different algorithm from what you suggested, unless you compute the transitive closure of your dependency graph first.
Sets and lists are both well-documented standard modules, and their documentation is freely available online. Ask questions on StackOverflow if you have specific issues with them.
You asked us to explain the piece of code you provide for eq_classes. The explanation is that it folds on an empty set, so it returns its initial value - an empty map. It is, as such, completely pointless. A more appropriate implementation would be:
let equivalence_classes matrix =
let classes = ref [] in
Array.iteri begin fun element _ ->
if not (List.exists (List.mem element) !classes) then
classes := equivalence_class matrix element :: !classes
end matrix ;
!classes
val equivalence_classes : bool array array -> int list list
This returns all the equivalence classes as a list-of-lists (each equivalence class being an individual list).
Question 3
The type system is pointing out that you have defined a comparison function that works on int, so you can only use it to sort an int list. If you intend to sort an int list list (a list of equivalence classes), then you need to define a comparison function for int list elements.
Assuming that (as mentioned above) your dependency graph is transitively closed, all you have to do is use your existing comparison algorithm and apply it to arbitrary representants of each class:
let compare_classes matrix c c` =
match c, c` with
| h :: _, h' :: _ -> if matrix.(h).(h') then 1 else -1
| _ -> 0
let sort_equivalence_classes matrix = List.sort (compare_classes matrix)
This code assumes that 1. each equivalence class only appears once and 1. each equivalence class contains at least one element. Both assumptions are reasonable when working with equivalence classes, and it is a simple process to eliminate duplicates and empty classes beforehand.
type a = [(Int,Int,Int,Int)]
fun:: a -> Int
func [a,b,c,d] = ?
I have a list of tuples like this what i required is to apply list comprehensions or pattern matching .. example taking sum or filter only divide 2 numbers ... i just want a start how to access values and or a list comprehension to this List of Tuples
To sum up the as, use something like this:
type A = [(Int, Int, Int, Int)]
func :: A -> Int
func tuples = sum [a | (a, b, c, d) <- tuples]
Also note that a type alias must begin with an upper case letter. Lower case letters are used for type variables.
hammar's answer covered list comprehensions, the basic schema for recursive functions using pattern matching is:
f [] = ..
f ((a,b,c,d):xs) = ..
So you need to specify a base case for a list containing no 4-tuples, and a recursive case for when the list consists of a 4-tuple (a,b,c,d) followed by a (possibly empty, possibly non-empty) list of 4-tuples xs. The pattern on the second line is a nested pattern: it first matches the list against a pattern like (x:xs), i.e. element x followed by rest of list xs; and then it matches x against the 4-tuple structure.
Below, I'll give some basic examples. Note that you can also write this with standard higher-order functions, such as filter and map, and I'm deliberaty not mentioning things like #-patterns and strictness. I do not recommend doing it like this, but it's just to give you an idea!
When you want to sum the first part of the tuples, you could do it like this:
sum4 :: [(Int,Int,Int,Int)] -> Int
sum4 [] = 0
sum4 ((a,b,c,d):xs) = a + sum4 xs
If you want to filter out the tuples where all of a,b,c and d are even:
filter4allEven :: [(Int,Int,Int,Int)] -> [(Int,Int,Int,Int)]
filter4allEven [] = []
filter4allEven ((a,b,c,d):xs)
| all even [a,b,c,d] = (a,b,c,d) : filter4AllEven xs
| otherwise = filter4AllEven xs
(If the use of all confuses you, just read even a && even b && even c && even d)
And finally, here's a function that returns all the even tuple components (tuples themselves can't be even!) in the same order as they appear in the argument list:
evenTupleComponents :: [(Int,Int,Int,Int)] -> [Int]
evenTupleComponents [] = []
evenTupleComponents ((a,b,c,d):xs) = [x | x <- [a,b,c,d], even x] ++ evenTupleComponents
Once you do a couple of exercises like these, you'll see why using standard functions is a good idea, since they all follow similar patterns, like applying a function to each tuple separately, including or excluding a tuple when it has some property or, more generally, giving a base value for the empty list and a combining function for the recursive case. For instance, I would write evenTupleComponents as evenTupleComponents = filter even . concatMap (\(a,b,c,d) -> [a,b,c,d]), but that's a different story :)