type a = [(Int,Int,Int,Int)]
fun:: a -> Int
func [a,b,c,d] = ?
I have a list of tuples like this what i required is to apply list comprehensions or pattern matching .. example taking sum or filter only divide 2 numbers ... i just want a start how to access values and or a list comprehension to this List of Tuples
To sum up the as, use something like this:
type A = [(Int, Int, Int, Int)]
func :: A -> Int
func tuples = sum [a | (a, b, c, d) <- tuples]
Also note that a type alias must begin with an upper case letter. Lower case letters are used for type variables.
hammar's answer covered list comprehensions, the basic schema for recursive functions using pattern matching is:
f [] = ..
f ((a,b,c,d):xs) = ..
So you need to specify a base case for a list containing no 4-tuples, and a recursive case for when the list consists of a 4-tuple (a,b,c,d) followed by a (possibly empty, possibly non-empty) list of 4-tuples xs. The pattern on the second line is a nested pattern: it first matches the list against a pattern like (x:xs), i.e. element x followed by rest of list xs; and then it matches x against the 4-tuple structure.
Below, I'll give some basic examples. Note that you can also write this with standard higher-order functions, such as filter and map, and I'm deliberaty not mentioning things like #-patterns and strictness. I do not recommend doing it like this, but it's just to give you an idea!
When you want to sum the first part of the tuples, you could do it like this:
sum4 :: [(Int,Int,Int,Int)] -> Int
sum4 [] = 0
sum4 ((a,b,c,d):xs) = a + sum4 xs
If you want to filter out the tuples where all of a,b,c and d are even:
filter4allEven :: [(Int,Int,Int,Int)] -> [(Int,Int,Int,Int)]
filter4allEven [] = []
filter4allEven ((a,b,c,d):xs)
| all even [a,b,c,d] = (a,b,c,d) : filter4AllEven xs
| otherwise = filter4AllEven xs
(If the use of all confuses you, just read even a && even b && even c && even d)
And finally, here's a function that returns all the even tuple components (tuples themselves can't be even!) in the same order as they appear in the argument list:
evenTupleComponents :: [(Int,Int,Int,Int)] -> [Int]
evenTupleComponents [] = []
evenTupleComponents ((a,b,c,d):xs) = [x | x <- [a,b,c,d], even x] ++ evenTupleComponents
Once you do a couple of exercises like these, you'll see why using standard functions is a good idea, since they all follow similar patterns, like applying a function to each tuple separately, including or excluding a tuple when it has some property or, more generally, giving a base value for the empty list and a combining function for the recursive case. For instance, I would write evenTupleComponents as evenTupleComponents = filter even . concatMap (\(a,b,c,d) -> [a,b,c,d]), but that's a different story :)
Related
I'm beginner in haskell and I tried to add a number in a 2D list with specific index in haskell but I don't know how to do
example i have this:
[[],[],[]]
and I would like to put a number (3) in the index 1 like this
[[],[3],[]]
I tried this
[array !! 1] ++ [[3]]
but it doesn't work
As you may have noticed in your foray so far, Haskell isn't like many other languages in that it is generally immutable, so trying to change a value, especially in a deeply nested structure like that, isn't the easiest thing. [array !! 1] would give you a nested list [[]] but this is not mutable, so any manipulations you do this structure won't be reflected in the original array, it'll be a separate copy.
(There are specialized environments where you can do local mutability, as with e.g. Vectors in the ST monad, but these are an exception.)
For what you're trying to do, you'll have to deconstruct the list to get it to a point where you can easily make the modification, then reconstruct the final structure from the (modified) parts.
The splitAt function looks like it will help you with this: it takes a list and separates it into two parts at the index you give it.
let array = [[],[],[]]
splitAt 1 array
will give you
([[]], [[],[]])
This helps you by getting you closer to the list you want, the middle nested list.
Let's do a destructuring bind to be able to reconstruct your final list later:
let array = [[],[],[]]
(beginning, end) = splitAt 1 array
Next, you'll need to get at the sub-list you want, which is the first item in the end list:
desired = head end
Now you can make your modification -- note, this will produce a new list, it won't modify the one that's there:
desired' = 3:desired
Now we need to put this back into the end list. Unfortunately, the end list is still the original value of [[],[]], so we'll have to replace the head of this with our desired' to make it right:
end' = desired' : (tail end)
This drops the empty sub-list at the beginning and affixes the modified list in its place.
Now all that's left is to recombine the modified end' with the original beginning:
in beginning ++ end'
making the whole snippet:
let array = [[],[],[]]
(beginning, end) = splitAt 1 array
desired = head end
desired' = 3:desired
end' = desired' : (tail end)
in beginning ++ end'
or, if you're entering all these as commands in the REPL:
let array = [[],[],[]]
let (beginning, end) = splitAt 1 array
let desired = head end
let desired' = 3:desired
let end' = desired' : (tail end)
beginning ++ end'
As paul mentions, things in Haskell are immutable. What you want to do must be done not be modifying the list in place, but by destructuring the list, transforming one of its parts, and restructuring the list with this changed part. One way of destructuring (via splitAt) is put forth there; I'd like to offer another.
Lists in Haskell are defined as follows:
data [] a = [] | a : [a]
This reads "A list of a is either empty or an a followed by a list of a". (:) is pronounced "cons" for "constructor", and with it, you can create nonempty lists.
1 : [] -> [1]
1 : [2,3] -> [1,2,3]
1 : 2 : 3 : [] -> [1,2,3]
This goes both ways, thanks to pattern matching. If you have a list [1,2,3], matching it to x : xs will bind its head 1 to the name x and its tail [2,3] to xs. As you can see, we've destructured the list into the two pieces that were initially used to create it. We can then operate on those pieces before putting the list back together:
λ> let x : xs = [1,2,3]
λ> let y = x - 5
λ> y : xs
[-4,2,3]
So in your case, we can match the initial list to x : y : z : [], compute w = y ++ [3], and construct our new list:
λ> let x : y : z : [] = [[],[],[]]
λ> let w = y ++ [3]
λ> [x,w,z]
[[],[3],[]]
But that's not very extensible, and it doesn't solve the problem you pose ("with specific index"). What if later on we want to change the thousandth item of a list? I'm not too keen on matching that many pieces. Fortunately, we know a little something about lists—index n in list xs is index n+1 in list x:xs. So we can recurse, moving one step along the list and decrementing our index each step of the way:
foo :: Int -> [[Int]] -> [[Int]]
foo 0 (x:xs) = TODO -- Index 0 is x. We have arrived; here, we concatenate with [3] before restructuring the list.
foo n (x:xs) = x : foo (n-1) xs
foo n [] = TODO -- Up to you how you would like to handle invalid indices. Consider the function error.
Implement the first of those three yourself, assuming you're operating on index zero. Make sure you understand the recursive call in the second. Then read on.
Now, this works. It's not all that useful, though—it performs a predetermined computation on a specified item in a list of one particular type. It's time to generalize. What we want is a function of the following type signature:
bar :: (a -> a) -> Int -> [a] -> [a]
where bar f n xs applies the transformation f to the value at index n in the list xs. With this, we can implement the function from before:
foo n xs = bar (++[3]) n xs
foo = bar (++[3]) -- Alternatively, with partial application
And believe it or not, changing the foo you already wrote into the much more useful bar is a very simple task. Give it a try!
I have two strings
a :: [String]
a = ["A1","A2","B3","C3"]
and
b :: [String]
b = ["A1","B2","B3","D5"]
And I want to calculate the difference between two strings based on the first character and second character and combination of two characters.
If the combination of two elements are the same, it would be calculate as 1
The function I declared is
calcP :: [String] -> [String] -> (Int,[String])
calcP (x:xs) (y:ys) = (a,b)
where
a = 0 in
???
b = ????
I know that I should have a increment variable to count the correct element, and where I should put it in? For now I totally have no idea about how to do that, can anyone give me some hint??
The desired result would be
(2,["B2","D5"])
How should I do that?
I assume that the lists have the same size.
The differences between the two lists
Let's focus on the main part of the problem:
Prelude> a=["A1","A2","B3","C3"]
Prelude> b=["A1","B2","B3","D5"]
First, notice that the zip method zips two lists. If you use it on a and b, you get:
Prelude> zip a b
[("A1","A1"),("A2","B2"),("B3","B3"),("C3","D5")]
Ok. It's now time to compare the terms one to one. There are many ways to do it.
Filter
Prelude> filter(\(x,y)->x/=y)(zip a b)
[("A2","B2"),("C3","D5")]
The lambda function returns True if the elements of the pair are different (/= operator). Thus, the filter keeps only the pairs that don't match.
It's ok, but you have to do a little more job to keep only the second element of each pair.
Prelude> map(snd)(filter(\(x,y)->x/=y)(zip a b))
["B2","D5"]
map(snd) applies snd, which keeps only the second element of a pair, to every discordant pair.
Fold
A fold is more generic, and may be used to implement a filter. Let's see how:
Prelude> foldl(\l(x,y)->if x==y then l else l++[y])[](zip a b)
["B2","D5"]
The lambda function takes every pair (x,y) and compares the two elements. If they have the same value, the accumulator list remains the identical, but if the values are different, the accumulator list is augmented by the second element.
List comprehension
This is more compact, and should seem obvious to every Python programmer:
Prelude> [y|(x,y)<-zip a b, x/=y] -- in Python [y for (x,y) in zip(a,b) if x!= y]
["B2","D5"]
The number of elements
You want a pair with the number of elements and the elements themselves.
Fold
With a fold, it's easy but cumbersome: you will use a slightly more complicated accumulator, that stores simultaneously the differences (l) and the number of those differences (n).
Prelude> foldl(\(n,l)(x,y)->if x==y then (n,l) else (n+1,l++[y]))(0,[])$zip a b
(2,["B2","D5"])
Lambda
But you can use the fact that your output is redundant: you want a list preceeded by the length of that list. Why not apply a lambda that does the job?
Prelude> (\x->(length x,x))[1,2,3]
(3,[1,2,3])
With a list comprehension, it gives:
Prelude> (\x->(length x,x))[y|(x,y)<-zip a b, x/=y]
(2,["B2","D5"])
Bind operator
Finally, and for the fun, you don't need to build the lambda this way. You could do:
Prelude> ((,)=<<length)[y|(x,y)<-zip a b,x/=y]
(2,["B2","D5"])
What happens here? (,) is a operator that makes a pair from two elements:
Prelude> (,) 1 2
(1,2)
and ((,)=<<length) : 1. takes a list (technically a Foldable) and passes it to the length function; 2. the list and the length are then passed by =<< (the "bind" operator) to the (,) operator, hence the expected result.
Partial conclusion
"There is more than than one way to do it" (but it's not Perl!)
Haskell offers a lot of builtins functions and operators to handle this kind of basic manipulation.
What about doing it recursively? If two elements are the same, the first element of the resulting tuple is incremented; otherwise, the second element of the resulting tuple is appended by the mismatched element:
calcP :: [String] -> [String] -> (Int,[String])
calcP (x:xs) (y:ys)
| x == y = increment (calcP xs ys)
| otherwise = append y (calcP xs ys)
where
increment (count, results) = (count + 1, results)
append y (count, results) = (count, y:results)
calcP [] x = (0, x)
calcP x [] = (0, [])
a = ["A1","A2","B3","C3"]
b = ["A1","B2","B3","D5"]
main = print $ calcP a b
The printed result is (2,["B2","D5"])
Note, that
calcP [] x = (0, x)
calcP x [] = (0, [])
are needed to provide exhaustiveness for the pattern matching. In other words, you need to provide the case when one of the passed elements is an empty list. This also provides the following logic:
If the first list is greater than the second one on n elements, these n last elements are ignored.
If the second list is greater than the first one on n elements, these n last elements are appended to the second element of the resulting tuple.
I'd like to propose a very different method than the other folks: namely, compute a "summary statistic" for each pairing of elements between the two lists, and then combine the summaries into your desired result.
First some imports.
import Data.Monoid
import Data.Foldable
For us, the summary statistic is how many matches there are, together with the list of mismatches from the second argument:
type Statistic = (Sum Int, [String])
I've used Sum Int instead of Int to specify how statistics should be combined. (Other options here include Product Int, which would multiply together the values instead of adding them.) We can compute the summary of a single pairing quite simply:
summary :: String -> String -> Statistic
summary a b | a == b = (1, [ ])
| otherwise = (0, [b])
Combining the summaries for all the elements is just a fold:
calcP :: [String] -> [String] -> Statistic
calcP as bs = fold (zipWith summary as bs)
In ghci:
> calcP ["A1", "A2", "B3", "C3"] ["A1", "B2", "B3", "D5"]
(Sum {getSum = 2},["B2","D5"])
This general pattern (of processing elements one at a time into a Monoidal type) is frequently useful, and spotting where it's applicable can greatly simplify your code.
Ok so have been faced with a problem where basically I have a been told to make a multiset, or a list of tuples. (Char,Int) and then I have to write a function that takes a item and inserts it into this list, but if there is already a matching tuple in the list it increases the Int.
i.e. i had a list [(p,2),(w,3)] and i get another w it should give [(p,2),(w,4)]
How would you go about it, i've tried
listAdd :: Char->Int->ListOfT -> ListOfT
listAdd c i l
|length l == 0 =(c,i):l
|fst l == c = (c,i+1):l
but this gives loads of errors, i need to remove the list element at that point and replace it with with (c,i+1), so how do i remove from the list and how to i get i+1? also how do you make a loop which will go through all the elements in a list?
And i can't use any of the import Data stuff
I know this is asking a ton but any help would be great thanks.
Neo
Okay can this code be fiddled with so it can be used tto make tuples of any items not just chars. so i could load it up and make a list of tuples with stirngs instead, close it then load it up again and make a list of tuples of ints?
ok I think your idea is not bad you just have to get the details straight.
The loop you asked about is usually either done with recursion (as a list is a recursive structure that's a great idea) or with some higher order functions like map, filter, foldr, ... that will hide the recursion from you (you could say they abstract away the repeating stuff) - anway in this case I think the easiest way is just to go with what you started and use the direct recursion.
Here is a simple version (you maybe want to extent) that does the basic stuff:
listAdd :: Char -> [(Char,Int)] -> [(Char,Int)]
listAdd c [] = [(c,1)]
listAdd c ((c',i):xs)
| c' == c = (c,i+1):xs
| otherwise = (c',i) : listAdd c xs
as you can see the first case is very similar to what you had: if the dictionary (the second argument) is the empty list than you just add a new tuple with the char to insert and the number 1
if not then you check if the first element in the dictionary has the same character (c' here), if yes then you increase the count and if not you let this element stand as it is and recursively search through the rest of the dictionary.
Also note that you can use pattern matching here to not only deconstruct the dictionary into head::tail form but also deconstruct the head into (..,..) tuple parts as well.
If you want you can use a # in there to and get the second case a bit more concise:
listAdd :: Char -> [(Char,Int)] -> [(Char,Int)]
listAdd c [] = [(c,1)]
listAdd c (x#(c',i):xs)
| c' == c = (c,i+1):xs
| otherwise = x : listAdd c xs
PS: in case you wondered why I did not use your Int argument? Because I don't know what you want to do with it if there is already a value - here is a version where I just add it to it (seems resonable):
listAdd :: Char -> Int -> [(Char,Int)] -> [(Char,Int)]
listAdd c i [] = [(c,i)]
listAdd c i (x#(c',i'):xs)
| c' == c = (c,i+i'):xs
| otherwise = x : listAdd c i xs
List manipulations with just recursive functions can be indeed hard for beginners to grok, but in this case they should fit the problem nicely.
Let's start with a bit better signature and a helper.
type MyList = [(Char, Int)]
listAdd :: Char -> MyList -> MyList
listAdd p l = listAdd' p [] l
Notice that I've changed the signature to accept just Char; we don't need to supply the initial count, since if there are no such elements currently on the list, we'll just set it to 1 when adding a new element.
Okay, that's the basic skeleton. The helper is there just to make it easier to store the "already processed" part of the list. Let's look at it:
listAdd' :: Char -> MyList -> MyList -> MyList
First, we add the recursion end condition:
listAdd' p left [] = left ++ [(p, 1)]
This means that if we haven't found the element to replace earlier, we can just add it at the end.
listAdd' p left (x:right) = if p == fst x
then left ++ [(fst x, snd x + 1)] ++ right
else listAdd' p (left ++ [x]) right
Okay, so now we split up the "right" part to the first element of it and the rest. Let's look at the if:
if we managed to find the element, we can end the computation by appending the rest of the list to the modified element and what we had previously
if it's still not it, we proceed with recursion.
As an additional remark at the end, you could easily change Char to Eq a => a to allow your function to work on any type that can be directly compared, Char included.
How can I add a list to a list of lists? Say I want to add itemz to bagList, which is a list of lists. How can I do that?
bagList itemz = mappend bagList itemz
You might want to consider adding it at the front, this is faster:
bagItem bag item = item : bag
Also it looks like you're coming from an imperative mindset, the way you use bagList before and after the = is not quite right: the expressions before and after the = do not really represent the same construction. Before the = bagItem is used as a function, after the = it's used as some Monoid (which if itemz is a list would also need to be a list).
If you really do want to append the item (this will be slower, because the operation will require going all the way through the list to add the new item at the end, and the whole list will need to be reconstructed) you can do what Christoph suggests or you can go for a recursive formulation something like this:
appendItem :: a -> [a] -> [a]
appendItem i (x:xs) = x : appendItem i xs
appendItem i [] = i : []
If you both want to append and are also worried about performance, you should have a look at difference lists, for example look for the section on difference lists in this chapter in Learn You a Haskell.
Update
From the comments it seems what you are actually looking for is Maps. We can make a Map with each item as a key, and the number of occurrences as the value. In your case it seems this will be a Map String Int.
import Data.List (foldl')
import qualified Data.Map as M
bag :: M.Map String Int
bag = M.empty
addToBag :: M.Map String Int -> [String] -> M.Map String Int
addToBag = foldl' go
where go m i = M.insertWith (+) i 1 m
main = print $ addToBag bag ["a","b","c","a"]
-- fromList [("a",2), ("b", 1), ("c", 1)]
Haskell
addm::[Int]->Int
addm (x:xs) = sum(x:xs)
I was able to achieve to get a sum of a list using sum function but is it possible to get the sum of a list using map function? Also what the use of map function?
You can't really use map to sum up a list, because map treats each list element independently from the others. You can use map for example to increment each value in a list like in
map (+1) [1,2,3,4] -- gives [2,3,4,5]
Another way to implement your addm would be to use foldl:
addm' = foldl (+) 0
Here it is, the supposedly impossible definition of sum in terms of map:
sum' xs = let { ys = 0 : map (\(a,b) -> a + b) (zip xs ys) } in last ys
this actually shows how scanl can be implemented in terms of map (and zip and last), the above being equivalent to foldl (+) 0 xs === last $ scanl (+) 0 xs:
scanl' f z xs = let { ys = z : map (uncurry f) (zip ys xs) } in ys
I expect one can calculate many things with map, arranging for all kinds of information flow through zip.
edit: the above is just a zipWith in disguise of course (and zipWith is kind of a map2):
sum' xs = let { ys = 0 : zipWith (+) ys xs } in last ys
This seems to suggest that scanl is more versatile than foldl.
It is not possible to use map to reduce a list to its sum. That recursive pattern is a fold.
sum :: [Int] -> Int
sum = foldr (+) 0
As an aside, note that you can define map as a fold as well:
map :: (a -> b) -> ([a] -> [b])
map f = fold (\x xs -> f x : xs) []
This is because foldr is the canonical recursive function on lists.
References: A tutorial on the universality and expressiveness of fold, Graham Hutton, J. Functional Programming 9 (4): 355–372, July 1999.
After some insights I have to add another answer: You can't get the sum of a list with map, but you can get the sum with its monadic version mapM. All you need to do is to use a Writer monad (see LYAHFGG) over the Sum monoid (see LYAHFGG).
I wrote a specialized version, which is probably easier to understand:
data Adder a = Adder a Int
instance Monad Adder where
return x = Adder x 0
(Adder x s) >>= f = let Adder x' s' = f x
in Adder x' (s + s')
toAdder x = Adder x x
sum' xs = let Adder _ s = mapM toAdder xs in s
main = print $ sum' [1..100]
--5050
Adder is just a wrapper around some type which also keeps a "running sum." We can make Adder a monad, and here it does some work: When the operation >>= (a.k.a. "bind") is executed, it returns the new result and the value of the running sum of that result plus the original running sum. The toAdder function takes an Int and creates an Adder that holds that argument both as wrapped value and as running sum (actually we're not interested in the value, but only in the sum part). Then in sum' mapM can do its magic: While it works similar to map for the values embedded in the monad, it executes "monadic" functions like toAdder, and chains these calls (it uses sequence to do this). At this point, we get through the "backdoor" of our monad the interaction between list elements that the standard map is missing.
Map "maps" each element of your list to an element in your output:
let f(x) = x*x
map f [1,2,3]
This will return a list of the squares.
To sum all elements in a list, use fold:
foldl (+) 0 [1,2,3]
+ is the function you want to apply, and 0 is the initial value (0 for sum, 1 for product etc)
As the other answers point out, the "normal" way is to use one of the fold functions. However it is possible to write something pretty similar to a while loop in imperative languages:
sum' [] = 0
sum' xs = head $ until single loop xs where
single [_] = True
single _ = False
loop (x1 : x2 : xs) = (x1 + x2) : xs
It adds the first two elements of the list together until it ends up with a one-element list, and returns that value (using head).
I realize this question has been answered, but I wanted to add this thought...
listLen2 :: [a] -> Int
listLen2 = sum . map (const 1)
I believe it returns the constant 1 for each item in the list, and returns the sum!
Might not be the best coding practice, but it was an example my professor gave to us students that seems to relate to this question well.
map can never be the primary tool for summing the elements of a container, in much the same way that a screwdriver can never be the primary tool for watching a movie. But you can use a screwdriver to fix a movie projector. If you really want, you can write
import Data.Monoid
import Data.Foldable
mySum :: (Foldable f, Functor f, Num a)
=> f a -> a
mySum = getSum . fold . fmap Sum
Of course, this is silly. You can get a more general, and possibly more efficient, version:
mySum' :: (Foldable f, Num a) => f a -> a
mySum' = getSum . foldMap Sum
Or better, just use sum, because its actually made for the job.