I'm trying to implement a RLE decoder for a game, and it works, but I'd like to shrink the code a bit, but I can't figure out how to put List.append and the repeat and rleExpand calls on one line
The signature of List.append is List.append : 'T list -> 'T list -> 'T list, so obviously I cannot just do
List.append(repeat(pattern,count), rleExpand(tail,rleTag)) - but would like to know how to do that. I also can use the # operator - maybe that's the most readable one. But how do I use List.append if my lists are created by a function application like in the listing below?
let rec repeat(item,count) =
match count with
| 0 -> []
| n -> item :: repeat(item,n-1)
let rec rleExpand(packed, rleTag: int) =
match packed with
| [] -> []
| tag :: count :: pattern :: tail when tag = rleTag ->
let repeated = repeat(pattern,count)
let rest = rleExpand(tail,rleTag)
List.append repeated rest
| head :: tail -> head :: rleExpand(tail,rleTag)
I would probably write:
repeat(pattern,count) # rleExpand(tail,rleTag)
But you can also write
List.append (repeat(pattern,count)) (rleExpand(tail,rleTag))
You cannot use List.append(repeat(pattern,count), rleExpand(tail,rleTag)) as you originally suggested because List.append takes curried (rather than tupled) arguments.
Does something like this work?
let repeat(item, count) = [for i in 1 .. count -> item]
let rec rleExpand(packed, rleTag: int) =
match packed with
| [] -> []
| tag :: count :: pattern :: tail when tag = rleTag ->
List.collect id [repeat(pattern,count); rleExpand(tail,rleTag)]
| head :: tail -> head :: rleExpand(tail,rleTag)
It's also more commonplace to use make functions curryable by not using tuples as parameters.
Related
let rec some_none list =
match list with
| [] -> list
| hd::tl ->
if hd = 0 then
[None] # some_none tl
else
[Some hd] # some_none tl;;
When I run this program it returns
Error: This expression has type int list but an expression was expected of type
'a option list
Type int is not compatible with type 'a option
How can I make it so that I am able to change a regular a' list to a' option list?
These two lines
match list with
| [] -> list
imply that the list returned by some_none has the same type as its argument.
Changing that line to
| [] -> []
solves the issue, since the left-hand and right-hand side are now unrelated.
A more subtle way (and not really useful here) is to use the as construct,
| [] as x -> x
because ... as x construct captures the type of the pattern rather than the type of the scrutinee (here list). However, this construction is mostly useful with polymorphic variants.
Also notice that your function some_none change neither the length of the list nor the order of the elements of the list. This means that it can be written as a map:
let some_none = List.map (fun elt -> ... )
Adding to what octachron has already said, there's a few style and performance issues with your code too.
First, it's unnecessary to create a new list in order to concatenate it using # when :: exists to prepend a single element to a list:
let rec some_none list =
match list with
| [] -> []
| hd::tl ->
if hd = 0 then
None :: some_none tl
else
Some hd :: some_none tl
Second, you can match on literal patterns directly instead of using comparison in an if expression within the branch:
let rec some_none list =
match list with
| [] -> []
| 0::tl -> None :: some_none tl
| hd::tl -> Some hd :: some_none tl
Third, you can use function to match directly on the last function argument:
let rec some_none = function
| [] -> []
| 0::tl -> None :: some_none tl
| hd::tl -> Some hd :: some_none tl
And fourth, you can use List.map to transform elements individually:
let some_none =
List.map (function 0 -> None | x -> Some x)
And now you have a function that is suddenly much easier to read and understand fully.
I am currently doing a custom version of List.flatten and I blocked at one place.
I currently have:
let rec doflatten (ls:int list list) (flatList: int list) : int list =
match ls with
| [] -> flatList
| hd :: tl -> (doflatten (List.tl(ls)) (List.hd(hd) :: flatList))
currently this compiles, but when I call the function, it gives me a "failure hd". It is suppose to do something like:
doflatten [[1;2;4]; []; [9]; [5;6]] [] = [1;2;4;9;5;6]
You are working with a list of lists, so in this pattern:
| hd :: tl -> ...
the head hd is a list.
However, hd can be the empty list. Your code doesn't handle this case properly. You just need to decide what you want to do.
You can have an extra pattern like this:
| [] :: tl ->
this pattern will match the case in question.
let rec (l:int list) f int list =
match l with
| [] -> []
| hd::tl -> 2+tl
I want to know is hd the first element and then tl is the second element because when i do this I keep getting an error, if tl is not the second element how would i access the second element an in depth explanation of hd::tl would be highly appreciated thank you
No tl is not the second element, it is the rest of the list and it has type 'a list. Here hd and tl are just variable names that you choose to bind to the first element of a list, and to the rest of the list (i.e., to a list that contains all elements except the first one). You can choose other names, e.g., fst::rest. Getting the second element, in that case would be as easy as fst::snd::rest (or x::y::rest - again the name doesn't matter).
What you're trying to use is called pattern matching. It is a feature of some languages, that provides a mechanism to easily deconstruct compound data structures. The idea is that if you're deconstructing data structures the same way as you're constructing them, e.g,
let xs = [1;2;3;4]
and here is the deconstructing
let [x1;x2;x3;x4] = xs
In fact, [x;y;...;z] is a syntactic sugar for a more basic syntax x :: y:: ... :: z :: [], so another way to construct the [1;2;3;4] list is to use the following construct: 1::2::3::4::[]. The same works in the opposite direction, e.g.,
let x1::x2::x3::x4::[] = xs
Now we are ready to the next step, what if the structure on the right doesn't match the structure on the left, e.g.,
let [x;y;z] = [1;2]
or
let x::y::z::[] = 1::2::[]
In that case, the matching will fail. In our case in runtime. To prevent this, and to allow programmers to handle all possible configuration of their data structures OCaml provides the match construct in which you specify multiple variants of the value structure, and the first one that matches is chosen, e.g.,
let orcish_length xs = match xs with
| [] -> 0
| x :: [] -> 1
| x :: y :: [] -> 2
| x :: y :: z :: [] -> 3
The function above anticipates only lists that have up to three elements (because Orcs can't count beyond three). But we can. For this we will use the following feature -- if the last element of the list pattern is not [] (that is matches only and only with the empty list, and designates the end-of-list), but anything else (i.e., a variable), then this variable will be bound to all elements, e.g.,
let rec elvish_length xs = match xs with
| [] -> 0
| x :: [] -> 1
| x :: y :: [] -> 2
| x :: y :: z :: [] -> 3
| x :: y :: z :: leftovers -> 3 + elvish_length leftovers
So now, we anticipate all possible list patterns. However, the function is now overcomplicated (because Elves are complicating). Now, let's finally derive a normal, human readable, length function,
let rec length xs = match xs with
| [] -> 0
| x :: xs -> 1 + length xs
As an exercise, try to prove to yourself that this function anticipates all possible lists.
:: is read cons and is an infix version of List.cons. In a functional language like Ocaml, list is a linked list where i.e.[e1; e2; e3; e4] can be reduced to something like this:
cons(::)
/ \
e1 cons(::)
/ \
e2 cons(::)
/ \
e3 cons(::)
/ \
e4 [ ]
Basically, any list can be reduced to a tree of recursive cons expressions, which makes recursion so useful in Ocaml or similar functional languages. At each level, you can reduce a list to its head and its tail, where tail is the list minus its head and can be reduced further until last :: []. So with the above example, you can recursively reduce the list until you find the last element by pattern-matching:
let find_last li =
match li with
| [] -> None (* no element *)
| [last] -> Some last (* found last *)
| head :: tail -> find_last tail (* keep finding *)
;;
Note that [last] can be replaced with last::[] and head::tail with List.cons head tail. What is important is at any point a list can always be reduced to head :: tail, where head is the first element and tail is the list without head.
Pattern-matching is useful in matching the "shape" or state of the reducing list.
Hello All I am trying to flatten a list in Ocaml. I am a newbie so please pardon me if my mistake is dumb
So for example, if input is [[1];[2;3];[4]] I should end up with [1;2;3;4].
The idea I am trying to use is as follows
Iterate through the list from the right (Using fold_right) with accumaltor = []
The pseudo code is as follows
func flatten(list, accumalator)
For each item from right to left in list
If Item is a scalar then n :: accumalator
Else fi Item is a list of form head :: tail then
head :: flatten (tail, accumalator).
I think that theoretically the algorithm is correct, but please let me know if you disagree.
Now to my OCaml code to implement this algorithm
let rec flatten acc x =
match x with
n -> n :: acc
| [x] -> x :: acc
| head :: remainder ->
head :: ( my_flat acc remainder )
and my_flat = List.fold_right flatten
;;
my_flat [] [[1];[2;3];[4]]
The Error I get is the following
Error: This expression has type 'a but an expression was expected of type
'a list
The error occurs on the line that reads head :: ( my_flat acc remainder ) in the last pattern in the match statement
Any help is appreciated.
In OCaml, all the elements of a list must be the same type. Thus the value [1; [2; 3]; 4] is invalid all by itself. It contains two elements that are of type int and one element of type int list. In essence, your statement of the problem to be solved is impossible.
$ ocaml312
Objective Caml version 3.12.0
# [1; [2; 3]; 4];;
Characters 4-10:
[1; [2; 3]; 4];;
^^^^^^
Error: This expression has type 'a list
but an expression was expected of type int
This sounds like a homework problem, so I'll just say that restricting yourself to lists that are valid in OCaml may make it easier to solve.
Edit
OK, the problem can now be solved!
The essence of the reported type error is something like this. You have your accumulated result acc (of type int list in the example). You want to add the list x (also of type int list) to it. You've broken x into head (an int) and remainder (an int list). As you can see, remainder is not a suitable argument for your my_flat function. It wants an int list list, i.e., a list of lists of ints. In fact, your recursive call should almost certainly go to flatten and not to my_flat.
Another problem I see: the arguments of List.fold_right are: a function, a list, and a starting value. In your test call to my_flat, you're supplying the last two in the other order. The empty list [] is your starting value.
I hope this is enough to get you going. Since you're just starting out with OCaml there will probably be another problem or two before it works.
Edit 2
Here are a couple more comments, which might be spoilers if you're still working on your own solution....
A tidier version of your function my_flat is in the OCaml standard library under the name List.flatten. It's interesting to look at the implementation:
let rec flatten = function
[] -> []
| l::r -> l # flatten r
I'd call this a very elegant solution, but unfortunately it's not tail recursive. So it will consume some (linear) amount of stack space, and might even crash for a very long list.
Here's one based on the same idea, using the standard FP accumulator trick to get tail recursive behavior (as noted by Thomas):
let flatten2 ll =
let rec go acc = function
| [] -> List.rev acc
| l :: r -> go (List.rev_append l acc) r
in
go [] ll
As is often the case, the tail recursive version accumulates the result in reverse order, and reverses it at the end.
You can start by writing directly your algorithm, by decomposing the base cases of your input value, ie. the input list is either empty, or the head of the input list is empty, or the head of the input list has a head and a tail:
let rec flatten = function
| [] -> []
| [] :: t -> flatten t
| (x::y) :: t -> x :: (flatten (y::t))
You can then optimize the function, because this code is not tail-recursive and thus will crash when lists become too big. So you can rewrite this by using the usual technique:
let flatten list =
let rec aux accu = function
| [] -> accu
| [] :: t -> aux accu t
| (x::y) :: t -> aux (x::accu) (y::t) in
List.rev (aux [] list)
So my advice is: start by decomposing your problem based on the input types, and then later use accumulators to optimize your code.
I like this one, where the auxiliary function takes the accumulator, the first element of the list of lists, and the rest of the list of lists, it is clearer for me :
let flatten list =
let rec aux acc list1 list2 =
match list1 with
| x :: tail -> aux (x :: acc) tail list2
| [] ->
match list2 with
| [] -> List.rev acc
| x :: tail -> aux acc x tail
in
aux [] [] list
Thanks for all your help
Here is the code I used to solve this problem
let flatten list =
let rec flatten_each acc x =
match x with
[] -> acc
| head :: remainder -> head :: ( flatten_each acc remainder )
in
List.fold_right flatten_each ( List.rev list ) []
;;
Edit: as pointed out by Thomas this solution is not tail recursive. Tail recursive version is below
let flatten list =
let rec flatten_each acc x =
match x with
[] -> acc
| head :: remainder -> (flatten_each (acc # [head]) remainder )
in
List.fold_right flatten_each list []
;;
I'm working with a list of lists in OCaml, and I'm trying to write a function that combines all of the lists that share the same head. This is what I have so far, and I make use of the List.hd built-in function, but not surprisingly, I'm getting the failure "hd" error:
let rec combineSameHead list nlist = match list with
| [] -> []#nlist
| h::t -> if List.hd h = List.hd (List.hd t)
then combineSameHead t nlist#uniq(h#(List.hd t))
else combineSameHead t nlist#h;;
So for example, if I have this list:
[[Sentence; Quiet]; [Sentence; Grunt]; [Sentence; Shout]]
I want to combine it into:
[[Sentence; Quiet; Grunt; Shout]]
The function uniq I wrote just removes all duplicates within a list. Please let me know how I would go about completing this. Thanks in advance!
For one thing, I generally avoid functions like List.hd, as pattern maching is usually clearer and less error-prone. In this case, your if can be replaced with guarded patterns (a when clause after the pattern). I think what is happening to cause your error is that your code fails when t is []; guarded patterns help avoid this by making the cases more explicit. So, you can do (x::xs)::(y::ys)::t when x = y as a clause in your match expression to check that the heads of the first two elements of the list are the same. It's not uncommon in OCaml to have several successive patterns which are identical except for guards.
Further things: you don't need []#nlist - it's the same as just writing nlist.
Also, it looks like your nlist#h and similar expressions are trying to concatenate lists before passing them to the recursive call; in OCaml, however, function application binds more tightly than any operator, so it actually appends the result of the recursive call to h.
I don't, off-hand, have a correct version of the function. But I would start by writing it with guarded patterns, and then see how far that gets you in working it out.
Your intended operation has a simple recursive description: recursively process the tail of your list, then perform an "insert" operation with the head which looks for a list that begins with the same head and, if found, inserts all elements but the head, and otherwise appends it at the end. You can then reverse the result to get your intended list of list.
In OCaml, this algorithm would look like this:
let process list =
let rec insert (head,tail) = function
| [] -> head :: tail
| h :: t ->
match h with
| hh :: tt when hh = head -> (hh :: (tail # t)) :: t
| _ -> h :: insert (head,tail) t
in
let rec aux = function
| [] -> []
| [] :: t -> aux t
| (head :: tail) :: t -> insert (head,tail) (aux t)
in
List.rev (aux list)
Consider using a Map or a hash table to keep track of the heads and the elements found for each head. The nlist auxiliary list isn't very helpful if lists with the same heads aren't adjacent, as in this example:
# combineSameHead [["A"; "a0"; "a1"]; ["B"; "b0"]; ["A"; "a2"]]
- : list (list string) = [["A"; "a0"; "a1"; "a2"]; ["B"; "b0"]]
I probably would have done something along the lines of what antonakos suggested. It would totally avoid the O(n) cost of searching in a list. You may also find that using a StringSet.t StringMap.t be easier on further processing. Of course, readability is paramount, and I still find this hold under that criteria.
module OrderedString =
struct
type t = string
let compare = Pervasives.compare
end
module StringMap = Map.Make (OrderedString)
module StringSet = Set.Make (OrderedString)
let merge_same_heads lsts =
let add_single map = function
| hd::tl when StringMap.mem hd map ->
let set = StringMap.find hd map in
let set = List.fold_right StringSet.add tl set in
StringMap.add hd set map
| hd::tl ->
let set = List.fold_right StringSet.add tl StringSet.empty in
StringMap.add hd set map
| [] ->
map
in
let map = List.fold_left add_single StringMap.empty lsts in
StringMap.fold (fun k v acc-> (k::(StringSet.elements v))::acc) map []
You can do a lot just using the standard library:
(* compares the head of a list to a supplied value. Used to partition a lists of lists *)
let partPred x = function h::_ -> h = x
| _ -> false
let rec combineHeads = function [] -> []
| []::t -> combineHeads t (* skip empty lists *)
| (hh::_ as h)::t -> let r, l = List.partition (partPred hh) t in (* split into lists with the same head as the first, and lists with different heads *)
(List.fold_left (fun x y -> x # (List.tl y)) h r)::(combineHeads l) (* combine all the lists with the same head, then recurse on the remaining lists *)
combineHeads [[1;2;3];[1;4;5;];[2;3;4];[1];[1;5;7];[2;5];[3;4;6]];;
- : int list list = [[1; 2; 3; 4; 5; 5; 7]; [2; 3; 4; 5]; [3; 4; 6]]
This won't be fast (partition, fold_left and concat are all O(n)) however.