I would like to write a function that accepts a function which performs an operation on the elements of a list, and accepts the list as an argument as well. I am trying to practice with anonymous functions and iterate through a list without using the built in iter in OCaml.
I also wrote a test case which should pass when this function is completed. I am struggling to figure out how to do this, as I want to perform an operation on each element without returning anything, rather updating the list by this iterative operation.
This is how I have started and would like to maintain this format:
Any suggestions? Any help would be greatly appreciated.
let rec iteration (f: 'h -> unit) (l: 'h list) : unit =
let test () : bool =
let list = [1; 2; 3] in
iteration (fun r -> r * 2) list;
list = [2; 4; 6]
;; run_test "iteration" test
Related
I call a function in a module to generate unique labels, eg.
MyMod.gensym
defined as
let gensym : string -> string =
let c = ref 0 in
fun s -> incr c; Printf.sprintf "!%s%d" s (!c)
But, I want to be able to get reproducible results at certain times from functions that use this gensym, eg.
let reproducible = SomeMod.call x
may return ["!a1"; "!a2"] the first time and ["!a3"; ...] the second
How can I ensure reproducible output in this case (eg. force ref to start from the same value), but without needing to change the implementation of gensym in its module?
You could add an optional argument to reset it:
let gensym : ?reset:bool -> string -> string =
let c = ref 0 in
fun ?(reset=false) s ->
if reset then
c := 1
else
incr c;
Printf.sprintf "!%s%d" s (!c)
I created a generator to generate lists of int with the same lenght and to test the property of zip and unzip.
Running the test I get once in a while the error
Error: System.ArgumentException: list2 is 1 element shorter than list1
but it shouldn't happen because of my generator.
I got three times the test 100% passed and then the error above. Why?
It seems my generator is not working properly.
let samelength (x, y) =
List.length x = List.length y
let arbMyGen2 = Arb.filter samelength Arb.from<int list * int list>
type MyGenZ =
static member genZip() =
{
new Arbitrary<int list * int list>() with
override x.Generator = arbMyGen2 |> Arb.toGen
override x.Shrinker t = Seq.empty
}
let _ = Arb.register<MyGenZ>()
let pro_zip (xs: int list, ys: int list) =
(xs, ys) = List.unzip(List.zip xs ys)
|> Prop.collect (List.length xs = List.length ys)
do Check.Quick pro_zip
Your code, as written, works for me. So I'm not sure what exactly is wrong, but I can give you a few helpful (hopefully!) hints.
In the first instance, try not using the registrating mechanism, but instead using Prop.forAll, as follows:
let pro_zip =
Prop.forAll arbMyGen2 (fun (xs,ys) ->
(xs, ys) = List.unzip(List.zip xs ys)
|> Prop.collect (List.length xs))
do Check.Quick pro_zip
Note I've also changed your Prop.collect call to collect the length of the list(s), which gives somewhat more interesting output. In fact your property already checks that the lists are the same length (albeit implicitly) so the test will fail with a counterexample if they are not.
Arb.filter transforms an existing Arbitrary (i.e. generator and filter) to a new Arbitrary. In other words, arbMyGen2 has a shrinking function that'll work (i.e. only returns smaller pairs of lists that are of equal length), while in genZip() you throw the shrinker away. It would be fine to simply write
type MyGenZ =
static member genZip() = arbMyGen2
instead.
I am trying to make a module that would allow to create a table in ocaml. It would do a query called project to limit the table's values. However on the last line of the definition of the function chooser I am getting syntax error.
module type TABLE =
sig
type database
type table
val create_table: string list * string list* (string list) list -> table
val printTable : table -> string
val listToString : string list -> string
val project : string list * table -> table
val chooser : string list * string list-> string list
end;;
module UsingTable : TABLE =
struct
type table = (string list * string list* (string list) list)
type database = table list
let create_table (a,b,c) = (a,b,c)
let chooser inputList = (
for i = 0 to (List.length trueFalseList-1) do
if List.nth trueFalseList i = "True"
then
(List.nth inputList i)::ans
done
List.rev ans;;)
let project (conditions, aTable)= (
let rec innerProc tmp= function
n,[],v->List.rev tmp
|n,cH::cT,v-> if List.mem cH conditions
then innerProc (["True"]::tmp) (n,cT,v)
else innerProc (["False"]::tmp) (n,cT,v)
in
let trueFalseList = innerProc [] aTable
let rec finalListCreator = match aTable with
n,[],[]->n,[],[]
|n,cH::cT,[]->n,chooser cH ::finalListCreator cT,[]
|n,c,h::t -> n,c,chooser h ::finalListCreator t
)
let rec listToString aList = match aList with
[] -> ""
| h::t -> "\t"^h^"\t"^listToString t
let rec printTable aTable = match aTable with
[],[],[] -> ""
| [],[],vH::vT -> "\n"^(listToString vH)^printTable ([],[],vT)
| [],cH::cT,v -> "\t"^cH^"\t"^printTable([],cT, v)
| n, c , v-> "\n"^(List.hd n)^"\n\n"^printTable([],c, v)
end;;
let atable =UsingTable.create_table (["Student"], ["Id";"Name";"Gender";"Course"],
[["001";"Jim";"M";"AlgoDS"];
["002";"Linnea";"F";"Databases"];
["003";"Anna";"F";"C#"];
["004";"Abby";"F";"C#"];
["005";"Arthur";"M";"JavaScript"]]);;
print_string (UsingTable.printTable atable) ;;
These lines have at least two syntax problems:
let chooser inputList = (
for i = 0 to (List.length trueFalseList-1) do
if List.nth trueFalseList i = "True"
then
(List.nth inputList i)::ans
done
List.rev ans;;)
First, the for .. done is one expression, and List.rev ans is another expression. You need a semicolon (;) between them.
Second, you should use ;; only when you want the input up to that point to be processed. But here if you process the input at the ;; you are missing a right parenthesis.
In my opinion, you should be entering ;; only at the toplevel. The best way to think of this token is as an instruction to the toplevel. It's not part of normal OCaml syntax.
These are only the first two errors. There are quite a few other errors in the code. It might be good to add one function at a time to the module so you can concentrate on a few problems at a time.
Update
The environment you're using is a little bit extra complicated because it has an Evaluate button that asks to evaluate what you've typed so far. This makes the ;; token much less useful.
It would be a good discipline to use this environment without using the ;; token at all. Just click the Evaluate button when you want an evaluation.
The main trick is if you want to evaluate a statement (a unit-valued expression in OCaml) at the outer level, like say Printf.printf "hello world\n". The usual idiom to avoid putting ;; before this is to make it into a declaration like so:
let () = Printf.printf "hello world\n"
That is the one non-obvious idiom that people use when writing source code (where the ;; almost never appears in my experience).
I am pretty confused with both functions fold() and reduce() in Kotlin, can anyone give me a concrete example that distinguishes both of them?
fold takes an initial value, and the first invocation of the lambda you pass to it will receive that initial value and the first element of the collection as parameters.
For example, take the following code that calculates the sum of a list of integers:
listOf(1, 2, 3).fold(0) { sum, element -> sum + element }
The first call to the lambda will be with parameters 0 and 1.
Having the ability to pass in an initial value is useful if you have to provide some sort of default value or parameter for your operation. For example, if you were looking for the maximum value inside a list, but for some reason want to return at least 10, you could do the following:
listOf(1, 6, 4).fold(10) { max, element ->
if (element > max) element else max
}
reduce doesn't take an initial value, but instead starts with the first element of the collection as the accumulator (called sum in the following example).
For example, let's do a sum of integers again:
listOf(1, 2, 3).reduce { sum, element -> sum + element }
The first call to the lambda here will be with parameters 1 and 2.
You can use reduce when your operation does not depend on any values other than those in the collection you're applying it to.
The major functional difference I would call out (which is mentioned in the comments on the other answer, but may be hard to understand) is that reduce will throw an exception if performed on an empty collection.
listOf<Int>().reduce { x, y -> x + y }
// java.lang.UnsupportedOperationException: Empty collection can't be reduced.
This is because .reduce doesn't know what value to return in the event of "no data".
Contrast this with .fold, which requires you to provide a "starting value", which will be the default value in the event of an empty collection:
val result = listOf<Int>().fold(0) { x, y -> x + y }
assertEquals(0, result)
So, even if you don't want to aggregate your collection down to a single element of a different (non-related) type (which only .fold will let you do), if your starting collection may be empty then you must either check your collection size first and then .reduce, or just use .fold
val collection: List<Int> = // collection of unknown size
val result1 = if (collection.isEmpty()) 0
else collection.reduce { x, y -> x + y }
val result2 = collection.fold(0) { x, y -> x + y }
assertEquals(result1, result2)
Another difference that none of the other answers mentioned is the following:
The result of a reduce operation will always be of the same type (or a super type) as the data that is being reduced.
We can see that from the definition of the reduce method:
public inline fun <S, T : S> Iterable<T>.reduce(operation: (acc: S, T) -> S): S {
val iterator = this.iterator()
if (!iterator.hasNext()) throw UnsupportedOperationException("Empty collection can't be reduced.")
var accumulator: S = iterator.next()
while (iterator.hasNext()) {
accumulator = operation(accumulator, iterator.next())
}
return accumulator
}
On the other hand, the result of a fold operation can be anything, because there are no restrictions when it comes to setting up the initial value.
So, for example, let us say that we have a string that contains letters and digits. We want to calculate the sum of all the digits.
We can easily do that with fold:
val string = "1a2b3"
val result: Int = string.fold(0, { currentSum: Int, char: Char ->
if (char.isDigit())
currentSum + Character.getNumericValue(char)
else currentSum
})
//result is equal to 6
reduce - The reduce() method transforms a given collection into a single result.
val numbers: List<Int> = listOf(1, 2, 3)
val sum: Int = numbers.reduce { acc, next -> acc + next }
//sum is 6 now.
fold - What would happen in the previous case of an empty list? Actually, there’s no right value to return, so reduce() throws a RuntimeException
In this case, fold is a handy tool. You can put an initial value by it -
val sum: Int = numbers.fold(0, { acc, next -> acc + next })
Here, we’ve provided initial value. In contrast, to reduce(), if the collection is empty, the initial value will be returned which will prevent you from the RuntimeException.
Simple Answer
Result of both reduce and fold is "a list of items will be transformed into a single item".
In case of fold,we provide 1 extra parameter apart from list but in case of reduce,only items in list will be considered.
Fold
listOf("AC","Fridge").fold("stabilizer") { freeGift, itemBought -> freeGift + itemBought }
//output: stabilizerACFridge
In above case,think as AC,fridge bought from store & they give stabilizer as gift(this will be the parameter passed in the fold).so,you get all 3 items together.Please note that freeGift will be available only once i.e for the first iteration.
Reduce
In case of reduce,we get items in list as parameters and can perform required transformations on it.
listOf("AC","Fridge").reduce { itemBought1, itemBought2 -> itemBought1 + itemBought2 }
//output: ACFridge
The difference between the two functions is that fold() takes an initial value and uses it as the accumulated value on the first step, whereas the first step of reduce() uses the first and the second elements as operation arguments on the first step.
For example, instead of
- op =;
val it = fn : ''a * ''a -> bool
I would rather have
- op =;
val it = fn : ''a -> ''a -> bool
for use in
val x = getX()
val l = getList()
val l' = if List.exists ((op =) x) l then l else x::l
Obviously I can do this on my own, for example,
val l' = if List.exists (fn y => x = y) l then l else x::l
but I want to make sure I'm not missing a more elegant way.
You could write a helper function that curries a function:
fun curry f x y = f (x, y)
Then you can do something like
val curried_equals = curry (op =)
val l' = if List.exists (curried_equals x) l then l else x::l
My knowledge of SML is scant, but I looked through the Ullman book and couldn't find an easy way to convert a function that accepts a tuple to a curried function. They have two different signatures and aren't directly compatible with one another.
I think you're going to have to roll your own.
Or switch to Haskell.
Edit: I've thought about it, and now know why one isn't the same as the other. In SML, nearly all of the functions you're used to actually accept only one parameter. It just so happens that most of the time you're actually passing it a tuple with more than one element. Still, a tuple is a single value and is treated as such by the function. You can't pass such function a partial tuple. It's either the whole tuple or nothing.
Any function that accepts more than one parameter is, by definition, curried. When you define a function that accepts multiple parameters (as opposed to a single tuple with multiple elements), you can partially apply it and use its return value as the argument to another function.