How can i solve integer overflow in Clojure? - clojure

I am doing this exercise. Pascal's Trapezoid
My solution is:
(fn pascal[initseq]
(let [gen-nextseq (fn [s]
(let [s1 (conj (vec s) 0)
s2 (cons 0 s)]
(map + s1 s2)))]
(cons
initseq
(lazy-seq
(pascal
(gen-nextseq initseq))))))
I passed first three test cases, but failed the last one.
It says "java.lang.ArithmeticException: integer overflow"
So, is there a big integer in Clojure, or is there a better way to solve the problem?

Change + to +'. That will automagically get you a clojure.lang.BigInt if the result doesn't fit into a long. You can also use the N suffix on literals to get a BigInt.
(class (+' 3 2)) ;=> java.lang.Long
(class (+' 300000000000000000000000000000 2)) ;=> clojure.lang.BigInt
(class 3N) ;=> clojure.lang.BigInt

You can use +' instead of + for arbitrary precision.
(fn pascal[initseq]
(let [gen-nextseq (fn [s]
(let [s1 (conj (vec s) 0)
s2 (cons 0 s)]
(map + s1 s2)))]
^^
...
So you can modify the above marked potion of the code as follow.
(map +' s1 s2)))]

Related

Clojure function to Replace Count

I need help with an assignment that uses Clojure. It is very small but the language is a bit confusing to understand. I need to create a function that behaves like count without actually using the count funtion. I know a loop can be involved with it somehow but I am at a lost because nothing I have tried even gets my code to work. I expect it to output the number of elements in list. For example:
(defn functionname []
...
...)
(println(functionname '(1 4 8)))
Output:3
Here is what I have so far:
(defn functionname [n]
(def n 0)
(def x 0)
(while (< x n)
do
()
)
)
(println(functionname '(1 4 8)))
It's not much but I think it goes something like this.
This implementation takes the first element of the list and runs a sum until it can't anymore and then returns the sum.
(defn recount [list-to-count]
(loop [xs list-to-count sum 0]
(if (first xs)
(recur (rest xs) (inc sum))
sum
)))
user=> (recount '(3 4 5 9))
4
A couple more example implementations:
(defn not-count [coll]
(reduce + (map (constantly 1) coll)))
or:
(defn not-count [coll]
(reduce (fn [a _] (inc a)) 0 coll))
or:
(defn not-count [coll]
(apply + (map (fn [_] 1) coll)))
result:
(not-count '(5 7 8 1))
=> 4
I personally like the first one with reduce and constantly.

Return an else value when using recur

I am new to Clojure, and doing my best to forget all my previous experience with more procedural languages (java, ruby, swift) and embrace Clojure for what it is. I am actually really enjoying the way it makes me think differently -- however, I have come up against a pattern that I just can't seem to figure out. The easiest way to illustrate, is with some code:
(defn char-to-int [c] (Integer/valueOf (str c)))
(defn digits-dont-decrease? [str]
(let [digits (map char-to-int (seq str)) i 0]
(when (< i 5)
(if (> (nth digits i) (nth digits (+ i 1)))
false
(recur (inc i))))))
(def result (digits-dont-decrease? "112233"))
(if (= true result)
(println "fit rules")
(println "doesn't fit rules"))
The input is a 6 digit number as a string, and I am simply attempting to make sure that each digit from left to right is >= the previous digit. I want to return false if it doesn't, and true if it does. The false situation works great -- however, given that recur needs to be the last thing in the function (as far as I can tell), how do I return true. As it is, when the condition is satisfied, I get an illegal argument exception:
Execution error (IllegalArgumentException) at clojure.exercise.two/digits-dont-decrease? (four:20).
Don't know how to create ISeq from: java.lang.Long
How should I be thinking about this? I assume my past training is getting in my mental way.
This is not answering your question, but also shows an alternative. While the (apply < ...) approach over the whole string is very elegant for small strings (it is eager), you can use every? for an short-circuiting approach. E.g.:
user=> (defn nr-seq [s] (map #(Integer/parseInt (str %)) s))
#'user/nr-seq
user=> (every? (partial apply <=) (partition 2 1 (nr-seq "123")))
true
You need nothing but
(apply <= "112233")
Reason: string is a sequence of character and comparison operator works on character.
(->> "0123456789" (mapcat #(repeat 1000 %)) (apply str) (def loooong))
(count loooong)
10000
(time (apply <= loooong))
"Elapsed time: 21.006625 msecs"
true
(->> "9123456789" (mapcat #(repeat 1000 %)) (apply str) (def bad-loooong))
(count bad-loooong)
10000
(time (apply <= bad-loooong))
"Elapsed time: 2.581750 msecs"
false
(above runs on my iPhone)
In this case, you don't really need loop/recur. Just use the built-in nature of <= like so:
(ns tst.demo.core
(:use demo.core tupelo.core tupelo.test))
(def true-samples
["123"
"112233"
"13"])
(def false-samples
["10"
"12324"])
(defn char->int
[char-or-str]
(let [str-val (str char-or-str)] ; coerce any chars to len-1 strings
(assert (= 1 (count str-val)))
(Integer/parseInt str-val)))
(dotest
(is= 5 (char->int "5"))
(is= 5 (char->int \5))
(is= [1 2 3] (mapv char->int "123"))
; this shows what we are going for
(is (<= 1 1 2 2 3 3))
(isnt (<= 1 1 2 1 3 3))
and now test the char sequences:
;-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
; using built-in `<=` function
(doseq [true-samp true-samples]
(let [digit-vals (mapv char->int true-samp)]
(is (apply <= digit-vals))))
(doseq [false-samp false-samples]
(let [digit-vals (mapv char->int false-samp)]
(isnt (apply <= digit-vals))))
if you want to write your own, you can like so:
(defn increasing-equal-seq?
"Returns true iff sequence is non-decreasing"
[coll]
(when (< (count coll) 2)
(throw (ex-info "coll must have at least 2 vals" {:coll coll})))
(loop [prev (first coll)
remaining (rest coll)]
(if (empty? remaining)
true
(let [curr (first remaining)
prev-next curr
remaining-next (rest remaining)]
(if (<= prev curr)
(recur prev-next remaining-next)
false)))))
;-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
; using home-grown loop/recur
(doseq [true-samp true-samples]
(let [digit-vals (mapv char->int true-samp)]
(is (increasing-equal-seq? digit-vals))))
(doseq [false-samp false-samples]
(let [digit-vals (mapv char->int false-samp)]
(isnt (increasing-equal-seq? digit-vals))))
)
with result
-------------------------------
Clojure 1.10.1 Java 13
-------------------------------
Testing tst.demo.core
Ran 2 tests containing 15 assertions.
0 failures, 0 errors.
Passed all tests
Finished at 23:36:17.096 (run time: 0.028s)
You an use loop with recur.
Assuming you require following input v/s output -
"543221" => false
"54321" => false
"12345" => true
"123345" => true
Following function can help
;; Assuming char-to-int is defined by you before as per the question
(defn digits-dont-decrease?
[strng]
(let [digits (map char-to-int (seq strng))]
(loop [;;the bindings in loop act as initial state
decreases true
i (- (count digits) 2)]
(let [decreases (and decreases (>= (nth digits (+ i 1)) (nth digits i)))]
(if (or (< i 1) (not decreases))
decreases
(recur decreases (dec i)))))))
This should work for numeric string of any length.
Hope this helps. Please let me know if you were looking for something else :).
(defn non-decreasing? [str]
(every?
identity
(map
(fn [a b]
(<= (int a) (int b)))
(seq str)
(rest str))))
(defn non-decreasing-loop? [str]
(loop [a (seq str) b (rest str)]
(if-not (seq b)
true
(if (<= (int (first a)) (int (first b)))
(recur (rest a) (rest b))
false))))
(non-decreasing? "112334589")
(non-decreasing? "112324589")
(non-decreasing-loop? "112334589")
(non-decreasing-loop? "112324589")

clojure performance on badly performing code

I have completed this problem on hackerrank and my solution passes most test cases but it is not fast enough for 4 out of the 11 test cases.
My solution looks like this:
(ns scratch.core
(require [clojure.string :as str :only (split-lines join split)]))
(defn ascii [char]
(int (.charAt (str char) 0)))
(defn process [text]
(let [parts (split-at (int (Math/floor (/ (count text) 2))) text)
left (first parts)
right (if (> (count (last parts)) (count (first parts)))
(rest (last parts))
(last parts))]
(reduce (fn [acc i]
(let [a (ascii (nth left i))
b (ascii (nth (reverse right) i))]
(if (> a b)
(+ acc (- a b))
(+ acc (- b a))))
) 0 (range (count left)))))
(defn print-result [[x & xs]]
(prn x)
(if (seq xs)
(recur xs)))
(let [input (slurp "/Users/paulcowan/Downloads/input10.txt")
inputs (str/split-lines input)
length (read-string (first inputs))
texts (rest inputs)]
(time (print-result (map process texts))))
Can anyone give me any advice about what I should look at to make this faster?
Would using recursion instead of reduce be faster or maybe this line is expensive:
right (if (> (count (last parts)) (count (first parts)))
(rest (last parts))
(last parts))
Because I am getting a count twice.
You are redundantly calling reverse on every iteration of the reduce:
user=> (let [c [1 2 3]
noisey-reverse #(doto (reverse %) println)]
(reduce (fn [acc e] (conj acc (noisey-reverse c) e))
[]
[:a :b :c]))
(3 2 1)
(3 2 1)
(3 2 1)
[(3 2 1) :a (3 2 1) :b (3 2 1) :c]
The reversed value could be calculated inside the containing let, and would then only need to be calculated once.
Also, due to the way your parts is defined, you are doing linear time lookups with each call to nth. It would be better to put parts in a vector and do indexed lookup. In fact you wouldn't need a reversed parts, and could do arithmetic based on the count of the vector to find the item to look up.

clojure - ordered pairwise combination of 2 lists

Being quite new to clojure I am still struggling with its functions. If I have 2 lists, say "1234" and "abcd" I need to make all possible ordered lists of length 4. Output I want to have is for length 4 is:
("1234" "123d" "12c4" "12cd" "1b34" "1b3d" "1bc4" "1bcd"
"a234" "a23d" "a2c4" "a2cd" "ab34" "ab3d" "abc4" "abcd")
which 2^n in number depending on the inputs.
I have written a the following function to generate by random walk a single string/list.
The argument [par] would be something like ["1234" "abcd"]
(defn make-string [par] (let [c1 (first par) c2 (second par)] ;version 3 0.63 msec
(apply str (for [loc (partition 2 (interleave c1 c2))
:let [ch (if (< (rand) 0.5) (first loc) (second loc))]]
ch))))
The output will be 1 of the 16 ordered lists above. Each of the two input lists will always have equal length, say 2,3,4,5, up to say 2^38 or within available ram. In the above function I have tried to modify it to generate all ordered lists but failed. Hopefully someone can help me. Thanks.
Mikera is right that you need to use recursion, but you can do this while being both more concise and more general - why work with two strings, when you can work with N sequences?
(defn choices [colls]
(if (every? seq colls)
(for [item (map first colls)
sub-choice (choices (map rest colls))]
(cons item sub-choice))
'(())))
(defn choose-strings [& strings]
(for [chars (choices strings)]
(apply str chars)))
user> (choose-strings "123" "abc")
("123" "12c" "1b3" "1bc" "a23" "a2c" "ab3" "abc")
This recursive nested-for is a very useful pattern for creating a sequence of paths through a "tree" of choices. Whether there's an actual tree, or the same choice repeated over and over, or (as here) a set of N choices that don't depend on the previous choices, this is a handy tool to have available.
You can also take advantage of the cartesian-product from the clojure.math.combinatorics package, although this requires some pre- and post-transformation of your data:
(ns your-namespace (:require clojure.math.combinatorics))
(defn str-combinations [s1 s2]
(->>
(map vector s1 s2) ; regroup into pairs of characters, indexwise
(apply clojure.math.combinatorics/cartesian-product) ; generate combinations
(map (partial apply str)))) ; glue seqs-of-chars back into strings
> (str-combinations "abc" "123")
("abc" "ab3" "a2c" "a23" "1bc" "1b3" "12c" "123")
>
The trick is to make the function recursive, calling itself on the remainder of the list at each step.
You can do something like:
(defn make-all-strings [string1 string2]
(if (empty? string1)
[""]
(let [char1 (first string1)
char2 (first string2)
following-strings (make-all-strings (next string1) (next string2))]
(concat
(map #(str char1 %) following-strings)
(map #(str char2 %) following-strings)))))
(make-all-strings "abc" "123")
=> ("abc" "ab3" "a2c" "a23" "1bc" "1b3" "12c" "123")
(defn combine-strings [a b]
(if (seq a)
(for [xs (combine-strings (rest a) (rest b))
x [(first a) (first b)]]
(str x xs))
[""]))
Now that I wrote it I realize it's a less generic version of amalloiy's one.
You could also use the binary digits of numbers between 0 and 16 to form your combinations:
if a bit is zero select from the first string otherwise the second.
E.g. 6 = 2r0110 => "1bc4", 13 = 2r1101 => "ab3d", etc.
(map (fn [n] (apply str (map #(%1 %2)
(map vector "1234" "abcd")
(map #(if (bit-test n %) 1 0) [3 2 1 0])))); binary digits
(range 0 16))
=> ("1234" "123d" "12c4" "12cd" "1b34" "1b3d" "1bc4" "1bcd" "a234" "a23d" "a2c4" "a2cd" "ab34" "ab3d" "abc4" "abcd")
The same approach can apply to generating combinations from more than 2 strings.
Say you have 3 strings ("1234" "abcd" "ABCD"), there will be 81 combinations (3^4). Using base-3 ternary digits:
(defn ternary-digits [n] (reverse (map #(mod % 3) (take 4 (iterate #(quot % 3) n))))
(map (fn [n] (apply str (map #(%1 %2)
(map vector "1234" "abcd" "ABCD")
(ternary-digits n)
(range 0 81))
(def c1 "1234")
(def c2 "abcd")
(defn make-string [c1 c2]
(map #(apply str %)
(apply map vector
(map (fn [col rep]
(take (math/expt 2 (count c1))
(cycle (apply concat
(map #(repeat rep %) col)))))
(map vector c1 c2)
(iterate #(* 2 %) 1)))))
(make-string c1 c2)
=> ("1234" "a234" "1b34" "ab34" "12c4" "a2c4" "1bc4" "abc4" "123d" "a23d" "1b3d" "ab3d" "12cd" "a2cd" "1bcd" "abcd")

How do I filter elements from a sequence based on indexes

I have a sequence s and a list of indexes into this sequence indexes. How do I retain only the items given via the indexes?
Simple example:
(filter-by-index '(a b c d e f g) '(0 2 3 4)) ; => (a c d e)
My usecase:
(filter-by-index '(c c# d d# e f f# g g# a a# b) '(0 2 4 5 7 9 11)) ; => (c d e f g a b)
You can use keep-indexed:
(defn filter-by-index [coll idxs]
(keep-indexed #(when ((set idxs) %1) %2)
coll))
Another version using explicit recur and lazy-seq:
(defn filter-by-index [coll idxs]
(lazy-seq
(when-let [idx (first idxs)]
(if (zero? idx)
(cons (first coll)
(filter-by-index (rest coll) (rest (map dec idxs))))
(filter-by-index (drop idx coll)
(map #(- % idx) idxs))))))
make a list of vectors containing the items combined with the indexes,
(def with-indexes (map #(vector %1 %2 ) ['a 'b 'c 'd 'e 'f] (range)))
#'clojure.core/with-indexes
with-indexes
([a 0] [b 1] [c 2] [d 3] [e 4] [f 5])
filter this list
lojure.core=> (def filtered (filter #(#{1 3 5 7} (second % )) with-indexes))
#'clojure.core/filtered
clojure.core=> filtered
([b 1] [d 3] [f 5])
then remove the indexes.
clojure.core=> (map first filtered)
(b d f)
then we thread it together with the "thread last" macro
(defn filter-by-index [coll idxs]
(->> coll
(map #(vector %1 %2)(range))
(filter #(idxs (first %)))
(map second)))
clojure.core=> (filter-by-index ['a 'b 'c 'd 'e 'f 'g] #{2 3 1 6})
(b c d g)
The moral of the story is, break it into small independent parts, test them, then compose them into a working function.
The easiest solution is to use map:
(defn filter-by-index [coll idx]
(map (partial nth coll) idx))
I like Jonas's answer, but neither version will work well for an infinite sequence of indices: the first tries to create an infinite set, and the latter runs into a stack overflow by layering too many unrealized lazy sequences on top of each other. To avoid both problems you have to do slightly more manual work:
(defn filter-by-index [coll idxs]
((fn helper [coll idxs offset]
(lazy-seq
(when-let [idx (first idxs)]
(if (= idx offset)
(cons (first coll)
(helper (rest coll) (rest idxs) (inc offset)))
(helper (rest coll) idxs (inc offset))))))
coll idxs 0))
With this version, both coll and idxs can be infinite and you will still have no problems:
user> (nth (filter-by-index (range) (iterate #(+ 2 %) 0)) 1e6)
2000000
Edit: not trying to single out Jonas's answer: none of the other solutions work for infinite index sequences, which is why I felt a solution that does is needed.
I had a similar use case and came up with another easy solution. This one expects vectors.
I've changed the function name to match other similar clojure functions.
(defn select-indices [coll indices]
(reverse (vals (select-keys coll indices))))
(defn filter-by-index [seq idxs]
(let [idxs (into #{} idxs)]
(reduce (fn [h [char idx]]
(if (contains? idxs idx)
(conj h char) h))
[] (partition 2 (interleave seq (iterate inc 0))))))
(filter-by-index [\a \b \c \d \e \f \g] [0 2 3 4])
=>[\a \c \d \e]
=> (defn filter-by-index [src indexes]
(reduce (fn [a i] (conj a (nth src i))) [] indexes))
=> (filter-by-index '(a b c d e f g) '(0 2 3 4))
[a c d e]
I know this is not what was asked, but after reading these answers, I realized in my own personal use case, what I actually wanted was basically filtering by a mask.
So here was my take. Hopefully this will help someone else.
(defn filter-by-mask [coll mask]
(filter some? (map #(if %1 %2) mask coll)))
(defn make-errors-mask [coll]
(map #(nil? (:error %)) coll))
Usage
(let [v [{} {:error 3} {:ok 2} {:error 4 :yea 7}]
data ["one" "two" "three" "four"]
mask (make-errors-mask v)]
(filter-by-mask data mask))
; ==> ("one" "three")