Progress updates from a long-running, recursive Clojure function - clojure

I wrote this helper function:
(defn iterate-converge
"Returns the value from calling (f x) some number of times, until
`x` changes by less than a tolerance, `tol`. Will not execute more
than `b` (e.g. bailout) times."
[f x0 tol b]
(loop [f f x x0 tol tol b b i 0]
(if (>= i b)
(throw (ex-info "Failed to converge"
{:type ::failed-to-converge :tol tol :b b}))
(let [x' (f x)]
(if (< (abs (- x x')) tol)
x'
(recur f x' tol b (inc i)))))))
Depending upon the parameters, this can take a significant amount of time. I'd like the function report on its progress. I don't want it to be tied to console output (e.g. println).
My current ideas:
Add a callback function as a parameter. Call it for each pass through. This allows for push notification.
Add an atom as a parameter. Update it for each pass through. This would allow for polling or push notification by using add-watch.
Add a core.async channel as a parameter. Similar to (1) above but may give better multicore performance.
What would you do and why?

Just make it return a lazy sequence of candidate answers. Then you can iterate through them at your leisure, stopping whenever the answer is acceptable, or when you decide it's taken too long and you want to give up.

Personally I would rank these options in reverse order, #3 being most flexible because then you can handle the output in more interesting (and fun) ways.
If you are looking for more options, I can recommend the Narrator library as a way to accurately produce periodic reports of long running processes.

Related

Clojure - Creating a No Divisors function

I am really struggling to do this one function. The function is as follows
Write a function named no-divisors? which takes an input n. The function should return true if none of the numbers between 2 and √𝑛 divide n, and false otherwise. The function should use both your get-divisors function and your divides? function.
Hint: you will probably need to wrap the divides? function in an anonymous function so that you can pass in the value of n.
This is my get-divisors function:
(defn get-divisors [n]
(str (range 2 (inc (Math/floor (Math/sqrt n))))))
This is my divides? function:
(defn divide [a b]
(zero? (mod a b)))
I have tried to create a method in order to try and complete this task, however, to no luck.
This is what I tried:
(defn no-divisors [n]
divide(n (get-divisors n)))
And I received the output:
ClassCastException java.lang.Long cannot be cast to clojure.lang.IFn user/x (form-init5516475059937019181.clj:16)`
I have an idea in mind which I would like to share of how I could create this task, however, since this is my first time using Clojure I am not too sure of to implement this function or if it is even possible. I am extremely sorry that I have mixed syntax, it's just I have never used Clojure up until this point, but here is my draft/blueprint:
(defn no-divisors [n]
resultsArray = []
def results((get-divisors n))
for results in get-divisors
resultsArray.append(results)
for i=results[0]; i< results.count; i++
divide(n i)
)
I maybe on the right path or probably (most likely) completely wrong. I am grateful and thankful for any/all help I can possibly receive. Just a side note, both my get-divisors and divides? functions work flawlessly.
Firstly, you can't just put parentheses anywhere in the code like you can in other languages. They mean something specific in Clojure (and other lisps) when evaluating code, namely the first thing in the list is a verb; a function to call. Nested brackets mean repeated calls to the result of a function. So if you have a function alice that returns a function, like this (stay with me, I'm trying to explain the error you're getting ;) ):
(defn alice []
(fn [] :bob))
then you can call it like this
(alice) ;; => #function[user/alice/fn--6930]
and it will return the function that you have created inside, and you can call that anonymous function like this:
((alice)) ;; => :bob
to actually get the result of that function. Apologies if this is a bit much off the bat, but the parens have meaning, and that's the cause of the error you're getting:
ClassCastException java.lang.Long cannot be cast to clojure.lang.IFn
This means that you're trying to call a number as a function. clojure.lang.IFn is Clojure's way of saying "the thing I was expecting was something that I could call as a function". By java.lang.Long, Clojure's mean's "number". ClassCastException means I saw one thing and was expecting the other. So really, what this error is trying to say is you wrote an open paren ( and followed that up with something named a number and not a function. That seems very much like you've written divide(n (get-divisors n)) instead of (divide n (get-divisors n)), because when evaluating divide(n (get-divisors n)) it first tries to evaluate divide and discovers this is a function, but doesn't try and call it. Then it looks at the next form (n (get-divisors n)) and tries asks what n is, and finds it's a number, which can't be called as a function. Make sense?
In your pseudo-code, you have an array that you append data to to collect the results while iterate through a loop to build the results. This is a very imperative way of approaching the problem, and not really the way Clojure is trying to encourage you to solve problems. Clojure tends to learn towards a more data focused way of solving the problem. One way to think about the problem is the way in which it's phrased in English. Given a number n, take all the numbers less than the square-root of it, and check if they divide into n. If that list is empty return true, otherwise return false. In Clojure you could write:
(defn divide? [a b]
(zero? (mod a b)))
(defn no-divisors? [n]
(->> (range 2 n)
(take-while #(< (* % %) n))
(filter (partial divide? n))
empty?))
Here, we use the ->> macro to take a lazy sequence of numbers between 2 and n, then limit that sequence using take-while to only the ones where the square of the number is less than n. Then we check that each one divides into n using the divide? function, and finally ask if the list is empty?. Since Clojure's sequences are lazy, no actual computation occurs until we try to evaluate the result using empty? which will stop when it reaches an element in the sequence. This makes it more efficient than actually traversing the whole list for large values of n.
Hope this helps.
P.S. I'm not sure your implementation of get-divisors is quite correct.
You must test your work as you go along. Let's look at your get-divisors function:
(defn get-divisors [n]
(str (range 2 (inc (Math/floor (Math/sqrt n))))))
Let's try it:
=> (get-divisors 20)
"(2 3 4)"
This is a string of characters, not the collection of numbers it ought to be. Remove the damaging str call:
(defn get-divisors [n]
(range 2 (inc (Math/floor (Math/sqrt n)))))
Now
=> (get-divisors 20)
(2 3 4)
Good. And an edge case, just to make sure:
=> (get-divisors 16)
(2 3 4)
Good again! We can use this function with some confidence.
Now we want to find out whether something is true of none of this collection. There's a handy function called not-any? that does this. For example,
=> (not-any? even? (range 1 100 2))
true
What we want to determine is whether none of the potential divisors of n actually divide n. So the shape of the function might be ...

HackerRank Compare the Triplets Clojure

I cannot work out why the atom references do not keep there values of inc.
1) How to correct this?
2) Why in debugging mode it seems to give correct values?
I know this may not be optimal solution but want to understand why it is not working.
Your task is to find their comparison points by comparing a0 with b0, a1 with b1, and a2 with b2.
If a is greater than b, then Alice is awarded point.
If a is less than b, then Bob is awarded point.
If a equals b then neither person receives a point.
(defn compare-the-triplets
[alice bob]
(let [alice-score (atom 0)
bob-score (atom 0)]
(for [i (range 3)]
(let [a (get alice i)
b (get bob i)]
(cond
(> a b) (swap! alice-score inc)
(< a b) (swap! bob-score inc))
)) [#alice-score #bob-score]))
(compare-the-triplets [5 6 7] [3 6 10])
When I run it it returns 0 and 0 for the Atom. I feel this may not be the best answer but its really annoying why the debug works and gets the atoms at the correct value but then they are not returned correctly.
Using the scope of let and for here must not be correct.
This is venturing into review territory, but I think it should be emphasized that atoms are not the right tool here. There's no leakage of side effects, but their use unnecessarily bloats everything up, and goes against common functional practice.
Since this is basically just a reduction, that's what I think would be the neatest here. You have a collection (or in this case, two), and need to accumulate a value (or again, in this case, two). Whenever this is the case, reduce should come to mind:
(defn compare-the-triplets2 [alice bob]
(reduce (fn [scores [al bo]]
; If the condition on the left is true, update either the 0th or 1st score
(cond-> scores
(> al bo) (update 0 inc)
(< al bo) (update 1 inc)))
; Both start with a score of 0
[0 0]
; Zip alice and bob together, then reduce over the zipped collection
(map vector alice bob)))
The fact that it's possible for a tie complicates things, but cond-> handles it well. Unfortunately, cond-> doesn't short circuit like cond does, so this will be slightly less efficient. Unless this proves to be time critical code though, the time difference should be beyond negligible.
Note the use of update, and how similar it is to your use of swap!. In this case though, I'm using 0 and 1 to indicate which score in the vector accumulator to increment.
You are correct!
for yields a lazy sequence: http://clojuredocs.org/clojure.core/for
See the use of dorun in the for documentation, or use doseq instead of for.

Creating refs with transducers

Is it possible to create a ref with a transducer in Clojure, in a way analogous to creating a chan with a transducer?
i.e., when you create a chan with a transducer, it filters/maps all the inputs into the outputs.
I'd expect there's also a way to create a ref such that whatever you set, it can either ignore or modify the input. Is this possible to do?
Adding a transducer to a channel modifies the contents as they pass through, which is roughly analogous to adding a watch to a ref that applies it's own change each time the value changes. This change it's self then triggers the watch again so be careful not to blow the stack if they are recursive.
user> (def r (ref 0))
#'user/r
user> (add-watch r :label
(fn [label the-ref old-state new-state]
(println "adding that little something extra")
(if (< old-state 10) (dosync (commute the-ref inc)))))
#<Ref#1af618c2: 0>
user> (dosync (alter r inc))
adding that little something extra
adding that little something extra
adding that little something extra
adding that little something extra
adding that little something extra
adding that little something extra
adding that little something extra
adding that little something extra
adding that little something extra
adding that little something extra
adding that little something extra
1
user> #r
11
You could even apply a transducer to the state of the atom if you wanted.
This is an interesting idea, but the wrong way to go about it for at least a couple reasons. You'd lose some relationships you'd expect to hold:
(alter r identity) =/= r
(alter r f)(alter r f) =/= (alter r (comp f f))
(alter r f) =/= (ref-set r (f #r))
Also some transducers are side-effecting volatiles, and have no business in a dosync block. i.e. if you use (take n) as your transducer then if your dosync fails, then it'll retry as though invoked with (take (dec n)), which violates dosync body requirements.
The problem is a ref lets you read and write as separate steps. If instead there was something foundational that let you "apply" an input to a hidden "state" and collect the output all in one step, consistently with the STM, then that'd be something to work with.

Clojure: reduce, reductions and infinite lists

Reduce and reductions let you accumulate state over a sequence.
Each element in the sequence will modify the accumulated state until
the end of the sequence is reached.
What are implications of calling reduce or reductions on an infinite list?
(def c (cycle [0]))
(reduce + c)
This will quickly throw an OutOfMemoryError. By the way, (reduce + (cycle [0])) does not throw an OutOfMemoryError (at least not for the time I waited). It never returns. Not sure why.
Is there any way to call reduce or reductions on an infinite list in a way that makes sense? The problem I see in the above example, is that eventually the evaluated part of the list becomes large enough to overflow the heap. Maybe an infinite list is not the right paradigm. Reducing over a generator, IO stream, or an event stream would make more sense. The value should not be kept after it's evaluated and used to modify the state.
It will never return because reduce takes a sequence and a function and applies the function until the input sequence is empty, only then can it know it has the final value.
Reduce on a truly infinite seq would not make a lot of sense unless it is producing a side effect like logging its progress.
In your first example you are first creating a var referencing an infinite sequence.
(def c (cycle [0]))
Then you are passing the contents of the var c to reduce which starts reading elements to update its state.
(reduce + c)
These elements can't be garbage collected because the var c holds a reference to the first of them, which in turn holds a reference to the second and so on. Eventually it reads as many as there is space in the heap and then OOM.
To keep from blowing the heap in your second example you are not keeping a reference to the data you have already used so the items on the seq returned by cycle are GCd as fast as they are produced and the accumulated result continues to get bigger. Eventually it would overflow a long and crash (clojure 1.3) or promote itself to a BigInteger and grow to the size of all the heap (clojure 1.2)
(reduce + (cycle [0]))
Arthur's answer is good as far as it goes, but it looks like he doesn't address your second question about reductions. reductions returns a lazy sequence of intermediate stages of what reduce would have returned if given a list only N elements long. So it's perfectly sensible to call reductions on an infinite list:
user=> (take 10 (reductions + (range)))
(0 1 3 6 10 15 21 28 36 45)
If you want to keep getting items from a list like an IO stream and keep state between runs, you cannot use doseq (without resorting to def's). Instead a good approach would be to use loop/recur this will allow you to avoid consuming too much stack space and will let you keep state, in your case:
(loop [c (cycle [0])]
(if (evaluate-some-condition (first c))
(do-something-with (first c) (recur (rest c)))
nil))
Of course compared to your case there is here a condition check to make sure we don't loop indefinitely.
As others have pointed out, it doesn't make sense to run reduce directly on an infinite sequence, since reduce is non-lazy and needs to consume the full sequence.
As an alternative for this kind of situation, here's a helpful function that reduces only the first n items in a sequence, implemented using recur for reasonable efficiency:
(defn counted-reduce
([n f s]
(counted-reduce (dec n) f (first s) (rest s) ))
([n f initial s]
(if (<= n 0)
initial
(recur (dec n) f (f initial (first s)) (rest s)))))
(counted-reduce 10000000 + (range))
=> 49999995000000

How to break out from nested doseqs

I have a question regarding nested doseq loops. In the start function, once I find an answer I set the atom to true, so that the outer loop validation with :while fails. However it seems that it doesn't break it, and the loops keep on going. What's wrong with it?
I am also quite confused with the usage of atoms, refs, agents (Why do they have different names for the update functions when then the mechanism is almost the same?) etc.
Is it okay to use an atom in this situation as a flag? Obviously I need a a variable like object to store a state.
(def pentagonal-list (map (fn [a] (/ (* a (dec (* 3 a))) 2)) (iterate inc 1)))
(def found (atom false))
(defn pentagonal? [a]
(let [y (/ (inc (Math/sqrt (inc (* 24 a)))) 6)
x (mod (* 10 y) 10)]
(if (zero? x)
true
false)))
(defn both-pent? [a b]
(let [sum (+ b a)
diff (- a b)]
(if (and (pentagonal? sum) (pentagonal? diff))
true
false)))
(defn start []
(doseq [x pentagonal-list :while (false? #found)]
(doseq [y pentagonal-list :while (<= y x)]
(if (both-pent? x y)
(do
(reset! found true)
(println (- x y)))))))
Even once the atom is set to true, your version can't stop running until the inner doseq finishes (until y > x). It will terminate the outer loop once the inner loop finishes though. It does terminate eventually when I run it. Not sure what you're seeing.
You don't need two doseqs to do this. One doseq can handle two seqs at once.
user> (doseq [x (range 0 2) y (range 3 6)] (prn [x y]))
[0 3]
[0 4]
[0 5]
[1 3]
[1 4]
[1 5]
(The same is true of for.) There is no mechanism for "breaking out" of nested doseqs that I know of, except throw/catch, but that's rather un-idiomatic. You don't need atoms or doseq for this at all though.
(def answers (filter (fn [[x y]] (both-pent? x y))
(for [x pentagonal-list
y pentagonal-list :while (<= y x)]
[x y])))
Your code is very imperative in style. "Loop over these lists, then test the values, then print something, then stop looping." Using atoms for control like this is not very idiomatic in Clojure.
A more functional way is to take a seq (pentagonal-list) and wrap it in functions that turn it into other seqs until you get a seq that gives you what you want. First I use for to turn two copies of this seqs into one seq of pairs where y <= x. Then I use filter to turn that seq into one that filters out the values we don't care about.
filter and for are lazy, so this will stop running once it finds the first valid value, if one is all you want. This returns the two numbers you want, and then you can subtract them.
(apply - (first answers))
Or you can further wrap the function in another map to calculate the differences for you.
(def answers2 (map #(apply - %) answers))
(first answers2)
There are some advantages to programming functionally in this way. The seq is cached (if you hold onto the head like I do here), so once a value is calculated, it remembers it and you can access it instantly from then on. Your version can't be run again without resetting the atom, and then would have to re-calculate everything. With my version you can (take 5 answers) to get the first 5 results, or map over the result to do other things if you want. You can doseq over it and print the values. Etc. etc.
I'm sure there are other (maybe better) ways to do this still without using an atom. You should usually avoid mutating references unless it's 100% necessary in Clojure.
The function names for altering atoms/agents/refs are different probably because the mechanics are not the same. Refs are synchronous and coordinated via transactions. Agents are asynchronous. Atoms are synchronous and uncoordinated. They all kind of "change a reference", and probably some kind of super-function or macro could wrap them all in one name, but that would obscure the fact that they're doing drastically different things under the hood. Explaining the differences fully is probably beyond the scope of an SO post to explain, but http://clojure.org fully explains all of the nuances of the differences.