I am building a minesweeper where the gameboard is a 2d array.
To generate the board I need to get a 2d array, randomly place some bombs, calculate all neighboring bombs for each field, then pack all together with another value (is-revealed) into a Map that should be the final value of each field.
It seems that to do all of this, I need the help of functions like map, filter, nth or zip, but instead of working on lists, they should work on a 2d array. I already started building those, but it seems like the wrong path to go.
Is there some cool abstraction that helps me use the existing functions on the 2d array? Or are there any functions already existing, that deal with 2d arrays?
edit: The way I was doing it - before thinking to myself, that there should be a better way - is something like this:
(defn mapmap [f xxs]
(for [xs xxs]
(map f xs)))
(defn mapmap-coords [f xxs]
(for [[i xs] (map-indexed list xxs)]
(map-indexed (fn [j x] (f j i)) xs)))
(defn get-value [board x y]
(if (or (< x 0) (< y 0) (< (dec (count board)) y))
false
(let [xs (nth board y)]
(if (< (dec (count xs)) x)
false
(nth xs x)))))
for works for nested sequential data.
user> (def game-state
(let [game '[[_ _ _ _]
[1 1 _ _]
[! 1 _ _]
[1 1 _ _]]]
(for [[i row] (map-indexed list game)
[j cell] (map-indexed list row)
:when (not= '_ cell)]
{:x i :y j :value cell})))
#'user/game-state
user> (pprint game-state)
({:x 1, :y 0, :value 1}
{:x 1, :y 1, :value 1}
{:x 2, :y 0, :value !}
{:x 2, :y 1, :value 1}
{:x 3, :y 0, :value 1}
{:x 3, :y 1, :value 1})
nil
We can use reduce to build up the data structure again (of course any transformations to the state could have been done in between).
user> (let [empty-game (vec (repeat 4 '[_ _ _ _]))
fill-cell (fn [game, {:keys [x y value]}] (assoc-in game [x y] value))
game (reduce fill-cell empty-game game-state)]
(doseq [row game] (apply println row)))
_ _ _ _
1 1 _ _
! 1 _ _
1 1 _ _
nil
If you're willing to drop down into Java types for your implementation, consider using
clojure.core/to-array-2d to create your 2d array and then
clojure.core/aget to index into it.
aget will give you a more natural method for accessing the array, but you'll still need to build further abstractions to get neighbours and perform updates to (i.e., regenerate) this data structure.
Related
I have a vector of vectors [[plate,'p1',0,1],[plate,'p2',0,2],[plate,'p3',1,1]] containing x,y positions of detected plates.
How do I retrieve the x position of plate p3?
It seems to be a simple task but I'm more familiar with python, so I'm not sure how to do this in clojure.
i would go with something like this:
(def data [[:plate "p1" 0 1] [:plate "p2" 0 2] [:plate "p3" 1 1]])
(some (fn [[_ v x y]] (when (= v "p3") [x y])) data)
;;=> [1 1]
(some (fn [[_ v x y]] (when (= v "p123") [x y])) data)
;;=> nil
(def p '[[plate,"p1",0,1],[plate,"p2",0,2],[plate,"p3",1,1]])
;; be aware, 'p1' you can use in Python, but because in Clojure `'` at beginning
;; of a symbol is parsed as `quote`, you can't use `''` instead of `""` in contrast to Python.
;; create a nested map out of the vec of vecs
(defn vecs-to-map [vecs]
(reduce (fn [m [_ id x y]] (assoc m id {:x x :y y}))
{}
vecs))
(def m (vecs-to-map p))
;;=> {"p1" {:x 0, :y 1}, "p2" {:x 0, :y 2}, "p3" {:x 1, :y 1}}
;; you can access such a nested list via `get-in` and giving the nested map
;; and the keys it should apply on it.
(get-in m ["p3" :x])
;;=> 1
Since the irregularity that one key is a string and the other a keyword is
not so nice, I would make out of them all keywords:
(defn vecs-to-map [vecs]
(reduce (fn [m [_ id x y]] (assoc m (keyword id) {:x x :y y}))
{}
vecs))
(def m (vecs-to-map p))
;; access it by:
(get-in m [:p3 :x])
;;=> 1
Additional Thoughts
We ignored the first element of the vec plate.
Let's say there exist also another vectors like
(def b '[[box "b1" 0 1] [box "b2" 0 2] [box "b3" 1 1]])
And if we want a nested map which contains :plate and :box in the
outer level as keys, we have to change the vecs-to-map function.
(defn vecs-to-map [vecs]
(reduce (fn [m [k id x y]] (assoc m (keyword k)
(assoc (get m (keyword k) {})
(keyword id) {:x x :y y})))
{}
vecs))
Then we can generate the map containing everything by:
(def m (vecs-to-map (concat p b)))
;; or alternatively in two steps:
;; (def m (vecs-to-map p))
;; (def m (merge m (vecs-to-map b)))
m
;; => {:plate {:p1 {:x 0, :y 1}, :p2 {:x 0, :y 2}, :p3 {:x 1, :y 1}}, :box {:b1 {:x 0, :y 1}, :b2 {:x 0, :y 2}, :b3 {:x 1, :y 1}}}
And we access the content by:
;; access through:
(get-in m [:plate :p3 :x])
;; => 1
(get-in m [:box :b2 :y])
;; => 2
You don't really provide much context on what you're trying to do but it feels like you want to filter the vector of tuples to those that have the symbol p3' in the second position and then return just the third and fourth elements of such a match?
If so, the following would work:
dev=> (def plate :plate)
#'dev/plate
dev=> (def data [[plate,'p1',0,1],[plate,'p2',0,2],[plate,'p3',1,1]])
#'dev/data
dev=> (let [[[_ _ x y]] (filter (comp #{'p3'} second) data)]
#_=> [x y])
[1 1]
This doesn't feel very idiomatic, so perhaps you could explain more of the context?
Note: 'p3' is a symbol whose name is p3' so I wonder if you mean "p3" for a string?
The vector of vector format doesn't seem very conducive to the sort of access you want to perform - perhaps changing it to a hash map, whose keys are the plate IDs (if that's what p1, p2, and p3 are?) would be better to work with?
Edit: in response to #leetwinkski's note about the result when there is no match, here's an alternative:
You could use when-first:
dev=> (when-first [[_ _ x y] (filter (comp #{'p123'} second) data)]
#_=> [x y])
nil
dev=> (when-first [[_ _ x y] (filter (comp #{'p3'} second) data)]
#_=> [x y])
[1 1]
Here is how I would do it, based on my favorite template project. Please also note that in Clojure strings always use double-quotes like "p1". Single quotes are totally different!
(ns tst.demo.core
(:use tupelo.core tupelo.test))
(defn vec-has-label
"Returns true iff a vector has the indicated label"
[vec lbl]
(= lbl (nth vec 1)))
(defn vec->x
"Given a vector, return the x value"
[vec]
(nth vec 2))
(defn find-label
[matrix label]
(let [tgt-vecs (filterv #(vec-has-label % label) matrix) ; find all matching vectors
x-vals (mapv vec->x tgt-vecs)] ; extract the x values
x-vals))
The unit tests show the code in action
(dotest
(isnt (vec-has-label '[plate "p1" 0 1] "p0"))
(is (vec-has-label '[plate "p1" 0 1] "p1"))
(is= 9 (vec->x '[plate "p1" 9 1]))
(let [matrix (quote
[[plate "p1" 0 1]
[plate "p2" 0 2]
[plate "p3" 1 1]])]
(is= (find-label matrix "p3")
[1])
))
The unit test show the 2 ways of "quoting" a data structure that contains one or more symbols. This would be unneeded if the redundant plate symbol weren't present.
See also this list of documentation sources.
I am fairly new to Clojure and would help help with some code. I have a function which takes a vector and i would like to loop through the vector and get the value at an index 'i' and the value of 'i' itself. 'i' is the value which is incremented in the loop.
I have checked 'for' at the clojure docs at for and wrote the following code.
(for [i some-vector]
(print (get-intersec i (.length some-vector) loop-count)))
The loop-count variable is supposed to be the loop count.
I have also checked loop but it does not seem like a feasible solution. Can someone help me with a clojure function i can use or help me write a macro or function that can do that.
Thank you.
Ps: To solve my problem, i use my own counter but would like a better solution.
First, keep in mind that for is for list comprehension, that is, creating new sequences. For looping through a sequence for some side effect, like printing, you probably want to use doseq.
To include a numeric count with each element as you loop through, you can use map-indexed:
(def xs [:a :b :c :d])
(doseq [[n elem] (map-indexed #(vector %1 %2) xs)]
(println n "->" elem))
Output:
0 -> :a
1 -> :b
2 -> :c
3 -> :d
If you find yourself doing this a lot, like I did, you can create a macro:
(defmacro doseq-indexed [[[item idx] coll] & forms]
`(doseq [[~idx ~item] (map-indexed #(vector %1 %2) ~coll)]
~#forms))
And use it like this:
> (doseq-indexed [[n elem] xs] (println n "->" elem))
0 -> :a
1 -> :b
2 -> :c
3 -> :d
Don't forget dotimes for simple stuff like this:
(let [data [:a :b :c :d]]
(dotimes [i (count data)]
(println i " -> " (data i))
; or (nth data i)
; or (get data i)
))
with result
0 -> :a
1 -> :b
2 -> :c
3 -> :d
Using loop/recur would look like this:
(let [data [:a :b :c :d]]
(loop [i 0
items data]
(let [curr (first items)]
(when curr
(println i "->" curr)
(recur (inc i) (rest items))))))
Update:
If you need this a lot, I already wrote a function that will add the index value to the beginning of each entry in a sequence:
(ns tst.demo.core
(:use tupelo.test)
(:require [tupelo.core :as t]) )
(dotest
(let [data [:a :b :c :d]]
(t/spy-pretty :indexed-data
(t/indexed data))))
with result
:indexed-data =>
([0 :a]
[1 :b]
[2 :c]
[3 :d])
The general signature is:
(indexed & colls)
Given one or more collections, returns a sequence of indexed tuples
from the collections like:
(indexed xs ys zs) -> [ [0 x0 y0 z0]
[1 x1 y1 z1]
[2 x2 y2 z2]
... ]
If your not set on using for, you could use map-indexed e.g.
(map-indexed (fn [i v]
(get-intersect v (.length some-vector) i))
some-vector))
I don't know what get-intersect is and assume .length is java interop? Anyway, map-indexed expects a function of 2 arguments, the 1st is the index and the second is the value.
I'm trying to write a function with recur that cut the sequence as soon as it encounters a repetition ([1 2 3 1 4] should return [1 2 3]), this is my function:
(defn cut-at-repetition [a-seq]
(loop[[head & tail] a-seq, coll '()]
(if (empty? head)
coll
(if (contains? coll head)
coll
(recur (rest tail) (conj coll head))))))
The first problem is with the contains? that throws an exception, I tried replacing it with some but with no success. The second problem is in the recur part which will also throw an exception
You've made several mistakes:
You've used contains? on a sequence. It only works on associative
collections. Use some instead.
You've tested the first element of the sequence (head) for empty?.
Test the whole sequence.
Use a vector to accumulate the answer. conj adds elements to the
front of a list, reversing the answer.
Correcting these, we get
(defn cut-at-repetition [a-seq]
(loop [[head & tail :as all] a-seq, coll []]
(if (empty? all)
coll
(if (some #(= head %) coll)
coll
(recur tail (conj coll head))))))
(cut-at-repetition [1 2 3 1 4])
=> [1 2 3]
The above works, but it's slow, since it scans the whole sequence for every absent element. So better use a set.
Let's call the function take-distinct, since it is similar to take-while. If we follow that precedent and make it lazy, we can do it thus:
(defn take-distinct [coll]
(letfn [(td [seen unseen]
(lazy-seq
(when-let [[x & xs] (seq unseen)]
(when-not (contains? seen x)
(cons x (td (conj seen x) xs))))))]
(td #{} coll)))
We get the expected results for finite sequences:
(map (juxt identity take-distinct) [[] (range 5) [2 3 2]]
=> ([[] nil] [(0 1 2 3 4) (0 1 2 3 4)] [[2 3 2] (2 3)])
And we can take as much as we need from an endless result:
(take 10 (take-distinct (range)))
=> (0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9)
I would call your eager version take-distinctv, on the map -> mapv precedent. And I'd do it this way:
(defn take-distinctv [coll]
(loop [seen-vec [], seen-set #{}, unseen coll]
(if-let [[x & xs] (seq unseen)]
(if (contains? seen-set x)
seen-vec
(recur (conj seen-vec x) (conj seen-set x) xs))
seen-vec)))
Notice that we carry the seen elements twice:
as a vector, to return as the solution; and
as a set, to test for membership of.
Two of the three mistakes were commented on by #cfrick.
There is a tradeoff between saving a line or two and making the logic as simple & explicit as possible. To make it as obvious as possible, I would do it something like this:
(defn cut-at-repetition
[values]
(loop [remaining-values values
result []]
(if (empty? remaining-values)
result
(let [found-values (into #{} result)
new-value (first remaining-values)]
(if (contains? found-values new-value)
result
(recur
(rest remaining-values)
(conj result new-value)))))))
(cut-at-repetition [1 2 3 1 4]) => [1 2 3]
Also, be sure to bookmark The Clojure Cheatsheet and always keep a browser tab open to it.
I'd like to hear feedback on this utility function which I wrote for myself (uses filter with stateful pred instead of a loop):
(defn my-distinct
"Returns distinct values from a seq, as defined by id-getter."
[id-getter coll]
(let [seen-ids (volatile! #{})
seen? (fn [id] (if-not (contains? #seen-ids id)
(vswap! seen-ids conj id)))]
(filter (comp seen? id-getter) coll)))
(my-distinct identity "abracadabra")
; (\a \b \r \c \d)
(->> (for [i (range 50)] {:id (mod (* i i) 21) :value i})
(my-distinct :id)
pprint)
; ({:id 0, :value 0}
; {:id 1, :value 1}
; {:id 4, :value 2}
; {:id 9, :value 3}
; {:id 16, :value 4}
; {:id 15, :value 6}
; {:id 7, :value 7}
; {:id 18, :value 9})
Docs of filter says "pred must be free of side-effects" but I'm not sure if it is ok in this case. Is filter guaranteed to iterate over the sequence in order and not for example take skips forward?
Just started learning Clojure, so I imagine my main issue is I don't know how to formulate the problem correctly to find an existing solution. I have a map:
{[0 1 "a"] 2, [0 1 "b"] 1, [1 1 "a"] 1}
and I'd like to "transform" it to:
{[0 1] "a", [1 1] "a"}
i.e. use the two first elements of the composite key as they new key and the third element as the value for the key-value pair that had the highest value in the original map.
I can easily create a new map structure:
=> (into {} (for [[[x y z] v] {[0 1 "a"] 2, [0 1 "b"] 1, [1 1 "a"] 1}] [[x y] {z v}]))
{[0 1] {"b" 1}, [1 1] {"a" 1}}
but into accepts no predicates so last one wins. I also experimented with :let and merge-with but can't seem to correctly refer to the map, eliminate the unwanted pairs or replace values of the map while processing.
You can do this by threading together a series of sequence transformations.
(->> data
(group-by #(->> % key (take 2)))
vals
(map (comp first first (partial sort-by (comp - val))))
(map (juxt #(subvec % 0 2) #(% 2)))
(into {}))
;{[0 1] "a", [1 1] "a"}
... where
(def data {[0 1 "a"] 2, [0 1 "b"] 1, [1 1 "a"] 1})
You build up the solution line by line. I recommend you follow in the footsteps of the construction, starting with ...
(->> data
(group-by #(->> % key (take 2)))
;{(0 1) [[[0 1 "a"] 2] [[0 1 "b"] 1]], (1 1) [[[1 1 "a"] 1]]}
Stacking up layers of (lazy) sequences can run fairly slowly, but the transducers available in Clojure 1.7 will allow you to write faster code in this idiom, as seen in this excellent answer.
Into tends to be most useful when you just need to take a seq of values and with no additional transformation construct a result from it using only conj. Anything else where you are performing construction tends to be better suited by preprocessing such as sorting, or by a reduction which allows you to perform accumulator introspection such as you want here.
First of all we have to be able to compare two strings..
(defn greater? [^String a ^String b]
(> (.compareTo a b) 0))
Now we can write a transformation that compares the current value in the accumulator to the "next" value and keeps the maximum. -> used somewhat gratuitusly to make the update function more readable.
(defn transform [input]
(-> (fn [acc [[x y z] _]] ;; take the acc, [k, v], destructure k discard v
(let [key [x y]] ;; construct key into accumulator
(if-let [v (acc key)] ;; if the key is set
(if (greater? z v) ;; and z (the new val) is greater
(assoc acc key z) ;; then update
acc) ;; else do nothing
(assoc acc key z)))) ;; else update
(reduce {} input))) ;; do that over all [k, v]s from empty acc
user> (def m {[0 1 "a"] 2, [0 1 "b"] 1, [1 1 "a"] 1})
#'user/m
user> (->> m
keys
sort
reverse
(mapcat (fn [x]
(vector (-> x butlast vec)
(last x))))
(apply sorted-map))
;=> {[0 1] "a", [1 1] "a"}
The question doesn't really explain what I want to do but I couldn't think of anything else.
I have an empty map in the outer let function in a piece of code, and an integer array.
I want to iterate through the integer array, perform a simple task, and keep appending the resulting map to the variables in the outer variables.
(let [a {} ;outer variables
b {}]
(doseq [x [1 2 3]]
(let [r (merge a {x (* x x)}) ;I want to append this to a
s (merge b {x (+ x x)})] ;and this to b
(println (str "--a--" r "--b--" s)))))
But as soon as I get out of doseq, my a and b vars are still empty. I get that the scope of a and b doesn't extend outside of doseq for it to persist any changes done from within and that they are immutable.
How do I calculate the values of a and b in such cases, please? I tried to extract the functionality of doseq into another function and calling let with:
(let [a (do-that-function)])
etc but even then I couldn't figure out a way to keep track of all the modifications within doseq loop to then send back as a whole.
Am I approaching this in a wrong way?
Thanks
edit
Really, what I'm trying to do is this:
(let [a (doseq [x [1 2 3]] {x (* x x)})]
(println a))
but doseq returns nil so a is going to be nil :-s
All variables in clojure are immutable. If you need a mutable state you should use atoms or refs.
But in your case you can simply switch from doseq to for:
(let [a (for [x [1 2 3]] {x (* x x)})]
(println a))
Here is an example of solving your problem with atoms:
(let [a (atom {})
b (atom {})]
(doseq [x [1 2 3]]
(swap! a assoc x (* x x))
(swap! b assoc x (+ x x)))
(println "a:" #a)
(println "b:" #b))
But you should avoid using mutable state as far as possible:
(let [l [1 2 3]
a (zipmap l (map * l l))
b (zipmap l (map + l l))]
(println "a:" a)
(println "b:" b))
The trick is to think in terms of flows of data adding to existing data making new data, instead of changing past data. For your specific problem, where a data structure is being built, reduce is typically used:
(reduce (fn [result x] (assoc result x (* x x))) {} [1 2 3])
hehe, I just noticed that "reduce" might seem confusing given that it's building something, but the meaning is that a collection of things is "reduced" to one thing. In this case, we give reduce an empty map to begin with, which binds to result in the fn, and each successive mapping over the collection results in a new result, which we add to again with assoc.
You could also say:
(into {} (map (fn [x] [x (* x x)]) [1 2 3]))
In your question you wanted to make multiple things at once from a single collection. Here's one way to do that:
(reduce (fn [[a b] x] [(assoc a x (* x x)) (assoc b x (+ x x))]) [{} {}] [1 2 3])
Here we used destructuring syntax to refer to our two result structures - just make a picture of the data [with [vectors]]. Note that reduce is still only returning one thing - a vector in this case.
And, we could generalize that:
(defn xfn [n fs]
(reduce
(fn [results x] (map (fn [r f] (assoc r x (f x x))) results fs))
(repeat (count fs) {}) (range n)))
=> (xfn 4 [* + -])
({3 9, 2 4, 1 1, 0 0} {3 6, 2 4, 1 2, 0 0} {3 0, 2 0, 1 0, 0 0})
The result is a list of maps. And if you wanted to take intermediate steps in the building of these results, you could change reduce to reductions. Generally, map for transforming collections, reduce for building a single result from a collection.