I have two lists ["a","b","c","d"] and ["b","d","a","c"]
How can I make a function that orders the first list with the same order of the second one?
In this example something like this:
> ord ["a","b","c","d"] ["b","d","a","c"]
["b","d","a","c"]
all the function I make give me an incomplete list:
ord :: [String] -> [String] -> [String]
ord [] _ = []
ord (h:t) (x:xs) | (h==x) = h:(ord t xs)
| otherwise = ord t (x:xs)
This is only an example; I can't simply present the second list.
Here's a quick and dirty solution that builds the result by grouping each string in the first list by the order in the second (I also renamed ord to orderThese):
orderThese :: [String] -> [String] -> [String]
orderThese _ [] = []
orderThese as (b:bs) = filter (\x -> x == b) as ++ orderThese as bs
As an example, orderThese ["a", "c", "a", "b"] ["b", "a", "c"] returns ["b","a","a","c"].
I think this is what you want:
import Data.Function (on)
import Data.List (elemIndex, sortBy)
ord :: Eq a => [a] -> [a] -> [a]
ord listToSort desiredOrder = sortBy (compare `on` (`elemIndex` desiredOrder)) listToSort
I would suggest that
you give the function a different name, as there is a function called ord in Data.Char; and
you swap the order of the parameters, as it seems more likely that you would want to partially apply the function with a desiredOrder than with a listToSort.
Related
I'm trying to change a list in haskell to include 0 between every element. If we have initial list [1..20] then i would like to change it to [1,0,2,0,3..20]
What i thought about doing is actually using map on every function, extracting element then adding it to list and use ++[0] to it but not sure if this is the right approach or not. Still learning haskell so might have errors.
My code:
x = map classify[1..20]
classify :: Int -> Int
addingFunction 0 [Int]
addingFunction :: Int -> [a] -> [a]
addingFunction x xs = [a] ++ x ++ xs
intersperse is made for this. Just import Data.List (intersperse), then intersperse 0 yourList.
You cannot do this with map. One of the fundamental properties of map is that its output will always have exactly as many items as its input, because each output element corresponds to one input, and vice versa.
There is a related tool with the necessary power, though:
concatMap :: (a -> [b]) -> [a] -> [b]
This way, each input item can produce zero or more output items. You can use this to build the function you wanted:
between :: a -> [a] -> [a]
sep `between` xs = drop 1 . concatMap insert $ xs
where insert x = [sep, x]
0 `between` [1..10]
[1,0,2,0,3,0,4,0,5,0,6,0,7,0,8,0,9,0,10]
Or a more concise definition of between:
between sep = drop 1 . concatMap ((sep :) . pure)
With simple pattern matching it should be:
addingFunction n [] = []
addingFunction n [x] = [x]
addingFunction n (x:xs) = x: n : (addingFunction n xs)
addingFunction 0 [1..20]
=> [1,0,2,0,3,0,4,0,5,0,6,0,7,0,8,0,9,0,10,0,11,0,12,0,13,0,14,0,15,0,16,0,17,0,18,0,19,0,20]
If you want to use map to solve this, you can do something like this:
Have a function that get a int and return 2 element list with int and zero:
addZero :: List
addZero a = [0, a]
Then you can call map with this function:
x = map addZero [1..20] -- this will return [[0,1], [0, 2] ...]
You will notice that it is a nested list. That is just how map work. We need a way to combine the inner list together into just one list. This case we use foldl
combineList :: [[Int]] -> [Int]
combineList list = foldl' (++) [] list
-- [] ++ [0, 1] ++ [0, 2] ...
So the way foldl work in this case is that it accepts a combine function, initial value, and the list to combine.
Since we don't need the first 0 we can drop it:
dropFirst :: [Int] -> [Int]
dropFirst list = case list of
x:xs -> xs
[] -> []
Final code:
x = dropFirst $ combineList $ map addZero [1..20]
addZero :: Int -> [Int]
addZero a = [0, a]
combineList :: [[Int]] -> [Int]
combineList list = foldl (++) [] list
dropFirst :: [Int] -> [Int]
dropFirst list = case list of
x:xs -> xs
[] -> []
We here can make use of a foldr pattern where for each element in the original list, we prepend it with an 0:
addZeros :: Num a => [a] -> [a]
addZeros [] = []
addZeros (x:xs) = x : foldr (((0 :) .) . (:)) [] xs
If you don't want to use intersperse, you can write your own.
intersperse :: a -> [a] -> [a]
intersperse p as = drop 1 [x | a <- as, x <- [p, a]]
If you like, you can use Applicative operations:
import Control.Applicative
intersperse :: a -> [a] -> [a]
intersperse p as = drop 1 $ as <**> [const p, id]
This is basically the definition used in Data.Sequence.
I'm trying to write a function with the type declaration [(Int, Bool)] -> [[Int]]. I want the function to only add Ints to the same nested sublist if the Boolean is True. However if the Boolean is False, I want the Int associated with the next True bool to be added to a new sublist. For example: An input of
[(1,True),(2,True),(3,False),(4,True),(5,False),(6,False),(7,True)]
should return
[[1,2],[4],[7]].
My code so far:
test:: [(Int, Bool)] -> [[Int]]
test xs = case xs of
[]->[]
x:xs
| snd x == True -> [(fst x)] : test xs
| snd x == False -> test xs
I'm currently having issues on adding concurrent Ints to the same list if their bools are both True.
You can break this problem into two sub-problems.
For any given list, take the head of this list and match it against the rest of list. There are two possibilities during this matching: i) You are successful i.e. you match, and if so, you collect the matched value and continue looking for more values, or ii) You fail, i.e. you don't match, and if so, you stop immediately and return the so far matched result with rest of, not-inspected, list.
collectF :: (Eq a) => (a -> Bool) -> [a] -> ([a], [a])
collectF f [] = ([], [])
collectF f (x : xs)
| f x = let (ys, zs) = collectF f xs in (x : ys, zs)
| otherwise = ([], x : xs)
Now that you have the collectF function, you can use it recursively on input list. In each call, you would get a successful list with rest of, not-inspected, list. Apply collectF again on rest of list until it is exhausted.
groupBy :: (Eq a) => (a -> a -> Bool) -> [a] -> [[a]]
groupBy _ [] = []
groupBy f (x : xs) =
let (ys, zs) = collectF (f x) xs in
(x : ys) : groupBy f zs
*Main> groupBy (\x y -> snd x == snd y) [(1,True),(2,True),(3,False),(4,True),(5,False),(6,False),(7,True)]
[[(1,True),(2,True)],[(3,False)],[(4,True)],[(5,False),(6,False)],[(7,True)]]
I am leaving it to you to remove the True and False values from List. Also, have a look at List library of Haskell [1]. Hope, I am clear enough, but let me know if you have any other question.
[1] http://hackage.haskell.org/package/base-4.12.0.0/docs/src/Data.OldList.html#groupBy
Repeatedly, drop the Falses, grab the Trues. With view patterns:
{-# LANGUAGE ViewPatterns #-}
test :: [(a, Bool)] -> [[a]]
test (span snd . dropWhile (not . snd) -> (a,b))
| null a = []
| otherwise = map fst a : test b
Works with infinite lists as well, inasmuch as possible.
Here's how I'd write this:
import Data.List.NonEmpty (NonEmpty(..), (<|))
import qualified Data.List.NonEmpty as NE
test :: [(Int, Bool)] -> [[Int]]
test = NE.filter (not . null) . foldr go ([]:|[])
where
go :: (Int, Bool) -> NonEmpty [Int] -> NonEmpty [Int]
go (n, True) ~(h:|t) = (n:h):|t
go (n, False) l = []<|l
Or with Will Ness's suggestion:
import Data.List.NonEmpty (NonEmpty(..))
test :: [(Int, Bool)] -> [[Int]]
test = removeHeadIfEmpty . foldr prependOrStartNewList ([]:|[])
where
prependOrStartNewList :: (Int, Bool) -> NonEmpty [Int] -> NonEmpty [Int]
prependOrStartNewList (n, True) ~(h:|t) = (n:h):|t
prependOrStartNewList (n, False) l = []:|removeHeadIfEmpty l
removeHeadIfEmpty :: NonEmpty [Int] -> [[Int]]
removeHeadIfEmpty (h:|t) = if null h then t else h:t
I have a Haskel function called flatten that works as such:
flatten :: [[a]] -> [a]
flatten [] = []
flatten ([]:vs) = flatten vs
flatten ((x:xs):vs) = x:flatten (xs:vs)
It takes a list of lists and combines it into one list. How can I make another function called flatten2set that works exactly like flatten (or calls flatten), but removes all duplicates, if any? I want to try and do this without tools like nub.
An example would be:
flatten2set [[1],[5,1,4],[9,1,3],[2,5]] --> [1,5,4,9,3,2]
I have attempted to implement a nub function:
nub:: Eq a => [a] -> [a]
nub (x:xs) = x : filter (/=x) (myNub xs)
nub [] = []
And when I have tried to use it like this:
flatten2set :: [[a]] -> [a]
flatten2set[x] = (myNub . flatten) [x]
I receive this error:
testing.hs:20:18: error:
• No instance for (Eq a) arising from a use of ‘myNub’
Possible fix:
add (Eq a) to the context of
the type signature for:
flatten2set :: forall a. [[a]] -> [a]
• In the first argument of ‘(.)’, namely ‘myNub’
In the expression: myNub . flatten
In the expression: (myNub . flatten) [x]
Any help would be appreciated!
You have an excellent implementation of myNub
myNub :: Eq a => [a] -> [a]
myNub (x:xs) = x : filter (/=x) (myNub xs)
myNub [] = []
Then you try to call it
flatten2set :: [[a]] -> [a]
flatten2set = myNub . flatten
But you've declared that flatten2set works for any a. The compiler is simply pointing out that that cannot be. What if we tried to call flatten2set with a list of lists of functions? It won't work because myNub requires Eq and functions are not comparable. Since we call a function that requires Eq a, we too must require Eq a.
flatten2set :: Eq a => [[a]] -> [a]
flatten2set = myNub . flatten
I took the liberty of removing the [x], which had no purpose. If you really want to have an argument, you just name the argument. There's no need to pattern match on it.
flatten2set :: Eq a => [[a]] -> [a]
flatten2set x = (myNub . flatten) x
Using [x] is an assertion that, in this case, the list will contain exactly one element, and we want flatten2set to work on lists containing any number of elements.
I'm going to use an example to explain my question because I'm not sure the best way to put it into words.
Lets say I have two lists a and b:
a = ["car", "bike", "train"] and b = [1, 3]
And I want to create a new list c by selecting the items in a whose positions correspond to the integers in b, so list c = ["car", "train"]
How would I do this in Haskell? I think I have to use list comprehension but am unsure how. Cheers.
The straightfoward way to do this is using the (!!) :: [a] -> Int -> a operator that, for a given list and zero-based index, gives the i-th element.
So you could do this with the following list comprehension:
filterIndex :: [a] -> [Int] -> [a]
filterIndex a b = [a!!(i-1) | i <- b]
However this is not efficient since (!!) runs in O(k) with k the index. Usually if you work with lists you try to prevent looking up the i-th index.
In case it is guaranteed that b is sorted, you can make it more efficient with:
-- Only if b is guaranteed to be sorted
filterIndex = filterIndex' 1
where filterIndex' _ _ [] = []
filterIndex' i a:as2 js#(j:js2) | i == j = a : tl js2
| otherwise = tl js
where tl = filterIndex' (i+1) as2
Or even more efficient:
-- Only if b is guaranteed to be sorted
filterIndex = filterIndex' 1
where filterIndex' i l (j:js) | (a:as) <- drop (j-i) l = a : filterIndex' (j+1) as (js)
filterIndex' _ _ [] = []
I am going to assume you're using b = [0, 2] instead (lists are 0 indexed in Haskell).
You can use a fold to build the new list:
selectIndices :: [a] -> [Int] -> [a]
selectIndices as is = foldr (\i bs -> as !! i : bs) [] is
This starts with an empty list and adds new elements by selecting them from the list of as using an index i from the list of indices is.
More advanced: if you prefer a point-free style, the same function can be written:
selectIndices :: [a] -> [Int] -> [a]
selectIndices as = foldr ((:) . (as !!)) []
Another approach which could be more efficient if the indices are sorted would be to go through the list one element at a time while keeping track of the current index:
selectIndices :: [a] -> [Int] -> [a]
selectIndices as is = go as 0 (sort is)
where
go :: [a] -> Int -> [Int] -> [a]
go [] _ _ = []
go _ _ [] = []
go (a:as) n (i:is)
| n == i = a : go as (n + 1) is
| otherwise = go as (n + 1) (i:is)
A simple approach is tagging the values in a with the indices and then filtering according to the indices:
filterIndex :: [Int] -> [a] -> [a]
filterIndex b = fmap snd . filter (\(i, _) -> i `elem` b) . zip [1..]
-- non-point-free version:
-- filterIndex b a = fmap snd (filter (\(i, _) -> i `elem` b) (zip [1..] a))
(If you want zero-based rather than one-based indexing, just change the infinite list to [0..]. You can even parameterise it with something like [initial..].)
If you need to make this more efficient, you might consider, among other things, a filtering algorithm that exploits ordering in b (cf. the answers by Boomerang and Willem Van Onsem), and building a dictionary from the zip [1..] a list of pairs.
Is there a Haskell function that takes a list and returns a list of duplicates/redundant elements in that list?
I'm aware of the the nub and nubBy functions, but they remove the duplicates; I would like to keep the dupes and collects them in a list.
The simplest way to do this, which is extremely inefficient, is to use nub and \\:
import Data.List (nub, (\\))
getDups :: Eq a => [a] -> [a]
getDups xs = xs \\ nub xs
If you can live with an Ord constraint, everything gets much nicer:
import Data.Set (member, empty, insert)
getDups :: Ord a => [a] -> [a]
getDups xs = foldr go (const []) xs empty
where
go x cont seen
| member x seen = x : r seen
| otherwise = r (insert x seen)
I wrote these functions which seems to work well.
The first one return the list of duplicates element in a list with a basic equlity test (==)
duplicate :: Eq a => [a] -> [a]
duplicate [] = []
duplicate (x:xs)
| null pres = duplicate abs
| otherwise = x:pres++duplicate abs
where (pres,abs) = partition (x ==) xs
The second one make the same job by providing a equality test function (like nubBy)
duplicateBy :: (a -> a -> Bool) -> [a] -> [a]
duplicateBy eq [] = []
duplicateBy eq (x:xs)
| null pres = duplicateBy eq abs
| otherwise = x:pres++duplicateBy eq abs
where (pres,abs) = partition (eq x) xs
Is there a Haskell function that takes a list and returns a list of duplicates/redundant elements in that list?
You can write such a function yourself easily enough. Use a helper function that takes two list arguments, the first one of which being the list whose dupes are sought; walk along that list and accumulate the dupes in the second argument; finally, return the latter when the first argument is the empty list.
dupes l = dupes' l []
where
dupes' [] ls = ls
dupes' (x:xs) ls
| not (x `elem` ls) && x `elem` xs = dupes' xs (x:ls)
| otherwise = dupes' xs ls
Test:
λ> dupes [1,2,3,3,2,2,3,4]
[3,2]
Be aware that the asymptotic time complexity is as bad as that of nub, though: O(n^2). If you want better asymptotics, you'll need an Ord class constraint.
If you are happy with an Ord constraint you can use group from Data.List:
getDups :: Ord a => [a] -> [a]
getDups = concatMap (drop 1) . group . sort