Difference between doseq and for in Clojure - clojure

What's the difference between doseq and for in Clojure? What are some examples of when you would choose to use one over the other?

The difference is that for builds a lazy sequence and returns it while doseq is for executing side-effects and returns nil.
user=> (for [x [1 2 3]] (+ x 5))
(6 7 8)
user=> (doseq [x [1 2 3]] (+ x 5))
nil
user=> (doseq [x [1 2 3]] (println x))
1
2
3
nil
If you want to build a new sequence based on other sequences, use for. If you want to do side-effects (printing, writing to a database, launching a nuclear warhead, etc) based on elements from some sequences, use doseq.

Note also that doseq is eager while for is lazy. The example missing in Rayne's answer is
(for [x [1 2 3]] (println x))
At the REPL, this will generally do what you want, but that's basically a coincidence: the REPL forces the lazy sequence produced by for, causing the printlns to happen. In a non-interactive environment, nothing will ever be printed. You can see this in action by comparing the results of
user> (def lazy (for [x [1 2 3]] (println 'lazy x)))
#'user/lazy
user> (def eager (doseq [x [1 2 3]] (println 'eager x)))
eager 1
eager 2
eager 3
#'user/eager
Because the def form returns the new var created, and not the value which is bound to it, there's nothing for the REPL to print, and lazy will refer to an unrealized lazy-seq: none of its elements have been computed at all. eager will refer to nil, and all of its printing will have been done.

Related

Good way in clojure to map function on multiple items of coll or seqence

I'm currently learning Clojure, and I'm trying to learn how to do things the best way. Today I'm looking at the basic concept of doing things on a sequence, I know the basics of map, filter and reduce. Now I want to try to do a thing to pairs of elements in a sequence, and I found two ways of doing it. The function I apply is println. The output is simply 12 34 56 7
(def xs [1 2 3 4 5 6 7])
(defn work_on_pairs [xs]
(loop [data xs]
(if (empty? data)
data
(do
(println (str (first data) (second data)))
(recur (drop 2 data))))))
(work_on_pairs xs)
I mean, I could do like this
(map println (zipmap (take-nth 2 xs) (take-nth 2 (drop 1 xs))))
;; prints [1 2] [3 4] [5 6], and we loose the last element because zip.
But it is not really nice.. My background is in Python, where I could just say zip(xs[::2], xs[1::2]) But I guess this is not the Clojure way to do it.
So I'm looking for suggestions on how to do this same thing, in the best Clojure way.
I realize I'm so new to Clojure I don't even know what this kind of operation is called.
Thanks for any input
This can be done with partition-all:
(def xs [1 2 3 4 5 6 7])
(->> xs
(partition-all 2) ; Gives ((1 2) (3 4) (5 6) (7))
(map (partial apply str)) ; or use (map #(apply str %))
(apply println))
12 34 56 7
The map line is just to join the pairs so the "()" don't end up in the output.
If you want each pair printed on its own line, change (apply println) to (run! println). Your expected output seems to disagree with your code, so that's unclear.
If you want to dip into transducers, you can do something similar to the threading (->>) form of the accepted answer, but in a single pass over the data.
Assuming
(def xs [1 2 3 4 5 6 7])
has been evaluated already,
(transduce
(comp
(partition-all 2)
(map #(apply str %)))
conj
[]
xs)
should give you the same output if you wrap it in
(apply println ...)
We supply conj (reducing fn) and [] (initial data structure) to specify how the reduce process inside transduce should build up the result.
I wouldn't use a transducer for a list that small, or a process that simple, but it's good to know what's possible!

Understand Clojure binding syntax

I am learning Clojure and was reading about doseq when I noticed an example like below on the official Clojure doc for doseq
(doseq [x [-1 0 1]
y [1 2 3]]
(prn (* x y)))
My confusion is with the expression [x [-1 0 1] y [1 2 3]].
Does this signify a binding expression? I tried some amount of google search but could not come across any documentation that describes such a form.
Could someone help me with understanding the various syntax representations for binding forms in Clojure?
This is a "binding form" in that it "binds" the values from the expression to the name x in turn. So it colloquially means an expression that binds names to values. This is part of "destructuring binding forms" which bind names to parts of a compound value such as a list or map.
The term "binding" instead of "setting" helps convey the difference between what this is doing and setting variables in some other programming languages. The name is attached to the value for the time it takes for the form inside the doseq to run, then the name is released to be attached to another value.
Clojure offers arbitrary structural binding to give names to any part of a value in most places in the language that assign names (bind symbols)
(doseq [[x1 x2] [[-1 -1] [0 0] [1 1]]
y [1 2 3]]
(prn (* x1 x2 y)))
is also a binding expression though it looks slightly deeper into the data and assigns names to two values per item in the first vector (and assumes there are two numbers in each of them) I'm very fond of this tutorial on destructuring/binding
It is like a nested for loop in Java. You can also do the nesting "manually":
(dotest
(newline)
(println "version 1")
(doseq [x [1 2]
y [:a :b :c]]
(println x y))
(newline)
(println "version 2")
(doseq [x [1 2]]
(doseq [y [:a :b :c]]
(println x y))))
with results:
version 1
1 :a
1 :b
1 :c
2 :a
2 :b
2 :c
version 2
1 :a
1 :b
1 :c
2 :a
2 :b
2 :c
Note that doseq always returns nil, and is only good for generating side-effects (like printing to the screen).
A for expression behaves similarly, but returns a (lazy) sequence of values (note we are generating a vector [x y] on each loop):
(newline)
(println "For generates a (lazy) sequence:"
(for [x [1 2]
y [:a :b :c]]
[x y]))
with result:
For generates a (lazy) sequence: ([1 :a] [1 :b] [1 :c] [2 :a] [2 :b] [2 :c])

Clojure Print the contents of a vector

In Clojure, how do you print the contents of a vector? (I imagine to the console, and usually for debugging purposes). If the answer can be generalized to any Seq that would be good.
Edit:
I should add that it should be a simple function that gives output that looks reasonable, so prints an item per line - so can be easily used for debugging purposes. I'm sure there are libraries that can do it, but using a library really does seem like overkill.
I usually use println. There are several other printing functions that you might want to try. See the "IO" section of the Clojure cheatsheet.
This isn't Java. Just print it, and it will look OK.
You can also use clojure.pprint/pprint to pretty-print it. This can be helpful with large, complex data structures.
These methods work for all of the basic Clojure data structures.
Exception: Don't print infinitely long lazy structures such as what (range) returns--for obvious reasons. For that you may need to code something special.
This works for me:
(defn pr-seq
([seq msg]
(letfn [(lineify-seq [items]
(apply str (interpose "\n" items)))]
(println (str "\n--------start--------\n"
msg "\nCOUNT: " (count seq) "\n"
(lineify-seq seq) "\n---------end---------"))))
([seq]
(pr-seq seq nil)))
Example usages:
(pr-seq [1 2 3])
(pr-seq (take 20 blobs) (str "First 20 of " (count blobs) " Blobs")))
If you want to just print out the elements of the sequence/vector you could just map println to your sequence/vector, but make sure you force map to evaluate using dorun:
(dorun (map println [1 2 3 4]))
This can be applied to sequences too:
(dorun (map println '(1 2 3 4)))
Another way you can do this with apply is to curry map with println and apply it to the sequence/vector:
(apply (partial map println) [[1 2 3 4]])
(apply (partial map println) ['(1 2 3 4)])
Another way you can do this is with doseq:
(doseq [e [1 2 3 4]]
(println e))
(doseq [e '(1 2 3 4)]
(println e))
This one at least stops the text going out too far to the right:
(defn pp
([n x]
(binding [pp/*print-right-margin* n]
(-> x clojure.pprint/pprint)))
([x]
(pp 100 x)))
It is possible to do partials of this function to alter the width.

How to iterate over ArrayMap in clojure?

I am totally new to clojure (started learning yesterday) and functional programming so please excuse my ignorance. I've been trying to read a lot of the clojure documentation, but much of it is totally over my head.
I'm trying to iterate over an ArrayMap of this set up:
{city1 ([[0 0] [0 1] [1 1] [1 0]]), city2 ([[3 3] [3 4] [4 4] [4 3]]), city3 ([[10 10] [10 11] [11 11] [11 10]])}
(^hopefully that syntax is correct, that is what it looks like my terminal is printing)
where the city name is mapped to a vector of vectors that define the points that make up that city's borders. I need to compare all of these points with an outside point in order to determine if the outside point is in one of these cities and if so which city it is in.
I'm using the Ray Casting Algorithm detailed here to determine if an outside point is within a vector of vectors.
Maps actually implement the clojure.lang.ISeq interface which means that you can use all the higher-level sequence operations on them. The single elements are pairs of the form [key value], so, to find the first element that matches a predicate in-city? you could e.g. use some:
(some
(fn [[city-name city-points]] ;; the current entry of the map
(when (in-city? the-other-point city-points) ;; check the borders
city-name)) ;; return the name of a matching city
cities)
You might also use keep to find all elements that match the predicate but I guess there is no overlap between cities in your example.
Update: Let's back off a little bit, since working with sequences is fun. I'm not gonna dive into all the sequence types and just use vectors ([1 2 3 ...]) for examples.
Okay, for a start, let's access our vector:
(first [1 2 3]) ;; => 1
(rest [1 2 3]) ;; => [2 3]
(last [1 2 3]) ;; => 3
(nth [1 2 3] 1) ;; => 2
The great thing about functional programming is, that functions are just values which you can pass to other functions. For example, you might want to apply a function (let's say "add 2 to a number") to each element in a sequence. This can be done via map:
(map
(fn [x]
(+ x 2))
[1 2 3])
;; => [3 4 5]
If you haven't seen it yet, there is a shorthand for function values where % is the first parameter, %2 is the second, and so on:
(map #(+ % 2) [1 2 3]) ;; => [3 4 5]
This is concise and useful and you'll probably see it a lot in the wild. Of course, if your function has a name or is stored in a var (e.g. by using defn) you can use it directly:
(map pos? [-1 0 1]) ;; => [false false true]
Using the predicate like this does not make a lot of sense since you lose the actual values that produce the boolean result. How about the following?
(filter pos? [-1 0 1]) ;; => [1]
(remove pos? [-1 0 1]) ;; => [-1 0]
This selects or discards the values matching your predicate. Here, you should be able to see the connection to your city-border example: You want to find all the cities in a map that include a given point p. But maps are not sequences, are they? Indeed they are:
(seq {:a 0 :b 1}) ;; => [[:a 0] [:b 1]]
Oh my, the possibilities!
(map first {:a 0 :b 1}) ;; => [:a :b]
(filter #(pos? (second %)) {:a 0 :b 1}) ;; => [[:b 1]]
filter retrieves all the matching cities (and their coordinates) but since you are only interested in the names - which are stored as the first element of every pair - you have to extract it from every element, similarly to the following (simpler) example:
(map first (filter #(pos? (second %)) {:a 0 :b 1}))
:: => [:b]
There actually is a function that combines map and filter. It's called keep and return every non-nil value its predicate produces. You can thus check the first element of every pair and then return the second:
(keep
(fn [pair]
(when (pos? (second pair))
(first pair)))
{:a 0 b 1})
;; => [:b]
Everytime you see yourself using a lot of firsts and seconds, maybe a few rests inbetween, you should think of destructuring. It helps you access parts of values in an easy way and I'll not go into detail here but it can be used with sequences quite intuitively:
(keep
(fn [[a b]] ;; instead of the name 'pair' we give the value's shape!
(when (pos? b)
a))
{:a 0 :b 1})
;; => [:b]
If you're only interested in the first result you can, of course, directly access it and write something like (first (keep ...)). But, since this is a pretty common use case, you get some offered to you by Clojure. It's like keep but will not look beyond the first match. Let's dive into your city example whose solution should begin to make sense by now:
(some
(fn [[city-name city-points]]
(when (in-city? p city-points)
city-name))
all-cities)
So, I hope this can be useful to you.

how to unit test for laziness

I have a function that is supposed to take a lazy seq and return an unrealized lazy seq. Now I want to write a unit test (in test-is btw) to make sure that the result is an unrealized lazy sequence.
user=> (instance? clojure.lang.LazySeq (map + [1 2 3 4] [1 2 3 4]))
true
If you have a lot of things to test, maybe this would simplify it:
(defmacro is-lazy? [x] `(is (instance? clojure.lang.LazySeq ~x)))
user=> (is-lazy? 1)
FAIL in clojure.lang.PersistentList$EmptyList#1 (NO_SOURCE_FILE:7)
expected: (clojure.core/instance? clojure.lang.LazySeq 1)
actual: (not (clojure.core/instance? clojure.lang.LazySeq 1))
false
user=> (is-lazy? (map + [1 2 3 4] [1 2 3 4]))
true
As of Clojure 1.3 there is also the realized? function: "Returns true if a value has been produced for a promise, delay, future or lazy sequence."
Use a function with a side effect (say, writing to a ref) as the sequence generator function in your test case. If the side effect never happens, it means the sequence remains unrealized... as soon as the sequence is realized, the function will be called.
First, set it up like this:
(def effect-count (ref 0))
(defn test-fn [x]
(do
(dosync (alter effect-count inc))
x))
Then, run your function. I'll just use map, here:
(def result (map test-fn (range 1 10)))
Test if test-fn ever ran:
(if (= 0 #effect-count)
(println "Test passed!")
(println "Test failed!"))
Since we know map is lazy, it should always work at this point. Now, force evaluation of the sequence:
(dorun result)
And check the value of effect-count again. This time, we DO expect the side effect to have triggered. And, it is so...
user=>#effect-count
9