I'm trying to convert an integer from decimal integer to a string based on base 4, but my unfoldr doesn't work and I'm not sure why or how to replace it. I can't use imports either. Please help me fix this.
dec2Base4 :: Int -> String
dec2Base4 = map i2c . reverse . unfoldr decomp
where
decomp n = if n == 0 then Nothing else Just(n `mod` 4, n `div` 4)
i2c i = if i == 0 then '0' else if i == 1 then '1' else if i == 2 then '2' else '3'
Example: dec2Base4 10-> "22"
Your code is basically OK, but it would need you to import the unfoldr function from the Data.List package.
The fact that you are banned from using import clauses might just mean that the powers that be want you to use plain recursion.
A recursion-based solution:
Unfortunately, recursion will naturally produce the least significant digit (rightmost digit) first, because this rightmost digit is essentially mod n 4. You will have to use the reverse function to correct that, just like in your library-based code.
For example, without the help of any non-Prelude library functions, the dec2Base4 function can be written like this:
dec2Base4 :: Int -> String
dec2Base4 n
| (n < 0) = '-' : (reverse (auxStr (-n)))
| (n == 0) = "0"
| otherwise = reverse (auxStr n) -- when n > 0
where
i2c i = "0123" !! i
auxStr 0 = ""
auxStr n = let (q,r) = (divMod n 4) in (i2c r) : (auxStr q)
Testing code:
unitTest :: Int -> IO ()
unitTest n = do
let res = dec2Base4 n
putStrLn $ "Result for " ++ (show n) ++ " is: " ++ res
main = do
let testList = [0,11,2051,-2051]
mapM_ unitTest testList
Test program output:
Result for 0 is: 0
Result for 11 is: 23
Result for 2051 is: 200003
Result for -2051 is: -200003
Related
I wanted to Print to A pascal Triangle for a given Length.
main = do
l_str <- getLine
let l_int = read $ l_str :: Int
let why = print_row l_int 0
print why
return ()
print_row x y
| (x < y) = " "
| otherwise = (print_column y 0 ) ++ "\n" ++ print_row x (y+1)
print_column y r
| (y < r) = ""
| otherwise = (show $ fact y r ) ++ print_column y (r+1)
fact n r
| (n >= r) = truncate $ (fact' n)/((fact' (n-r))*(fact' r))
fact' n
| (n >= 0) = product [1..n]
I have checked all my functions "print_row" ,"print_column" everything works fine.
I am getting this error:
PascalTriangle.hs:4:17:
No instance for (RealFrac Int) arising from a use of ‘fact’
In the expression: fact l_int 0
In an equation for ‘why’: why = fact l_int 0
In the expression:
do { l_str <- getLine;
let l_int = ...;
let why = fact l_int 0;
print why;
.... }
I am not able Understand anything about this error.The pogram works fine when I use a constant instead of l_int in line 4.Like let why = print_row 4 0.
You need to use div instead of /.
div will take two Integral values and return another Integral value - e.g. div 5 2 == 2. Then you'll also need to get rid of the truncate call.
/ does "floating point" division.
fromIntegral will convert an Integral value to any other Num type.
I am working on a program to get the closest prime number by the exponent of 2, this is between an interval.
module Main where
import Data.Char
import System.IO
import Control.Monad (liftM)
data PGetal = G Bool | P Int
instance Show PGetal where
show (P n) = show n
show (G False) = "GEEN PRIEMGETAL GEVONDEN"
mPriem::(Int, Int) -> PGetal
mPriem (x,y) | (x > y) = G False
| (x > 1000000) = G False
| (y > 1000000) = G False
| (null (getAllPriem(x,y))) = G False
| otherwise = P (kleinsteVerschilF(getAllPriem(x,y),1000000,1))
kleinsteVerschilF:: ([Int], Int , Int) -> Int
kleinsteVerschilF ([],_, priemGetal) = priemGetal
kleinsteVerschilF (priem1:priemcss, kleinsteVerschil,priemGetal)=
if(kleinsteVerschil <= kleinsteVerschilMetLijst (priem1,(getMachtenVanTwee(0)),1000000))then kleinsteVerschilF(priemcss, kleinsteVerschil,priemGetal)
else kleinsteVerschilF (priemcss,kleinsteVerschilMetLijst(priem1,(getMachtenVanTwee(0)),1000000), priem1)
kleinsteVerschilMetLijst :: (Int,[Int],Int) -> Int
kleinsteVerschilMetLijst ( _,[],kleinsteVerschil) = kleinsteVerschil
kleinsteVerschilMetLijst (x,tweeMachten1:tweeMachtencss,kleinsteverschil)=
if((abs(x-tweeMachten1)) < kleinsteverschil)
then kleinsteVerschilMetLijst(x,tweeMachtencss, (abs(x-tweeMachten1)))
else kleinsteVerschilMetLijst(x,tweeMachtencss, kleinsteverschil)
getAllPriem :: (Int, Int) ->[Int]
getAllPriem (x,y) = filter isPriem [x..y]
getMachtenVanTwee ::(Int) -> [Int]
getMachtenVanTwee (macht)
|(functieMachtTwee(macht)< 1000000) = (functieMachtTwee(macht)) : (getMachtenVanTwee ((macht+1)))
| otherwise = []
functieMachtTwee:: (Int) -> Int
functieMachtTwee (x) = 2^x
isPriem n = (aantalDelers n)==2
aantalDelers n = telAantalDelersVanaf n 1
telAantalDelersVanaf n kandidaatDeler
| n == kandidaatDeler = 1
| mod n kandidaatDeler == 0
= 1 + telAantalDelersVanaf n (kandidaatDeler+1)
| otherwise
= telAantalDelersVanaf n (kandidaatDeler+1)
aantalDelers2 getal = telDelers getal 1 0
where telDelers n kandidaat teller
| n == kandidaat = 1+teller
| mod n kandidaat == 0
= telDelers n (kandidaat+1) (teller+1)
| otherwise
= telDelers n (kandidaat+1) teller
transform :: [String] -> [PGetal]
transform [] = []
transform (cs:css) =
let (a : b: _ ) = words cs
in (mPriem ((read(a)),(read(b))): transform css)
main :: IO ()
main = do
n <- read `liftM` getLine :: IO Int
lss <- lines `liftM` getContents
let cases = take n lss
let vs = (transform (lss))
putStr $ unlines $ map show vs
When I use the mPriem function, it works fine.
But it needs to work with an input txt file, so I made a .exe file with the ghc command. I also added this .txt file in the folder.
10
1 1
1 3
1 100
200 250
14 16
5 10
20 31
16 50
100 120
5200 7341
When I use in command line this command, it does nothing. There is no output. I can't CTRL+C to stop the program, so I think it crashes. But I don't know what's wrong.
type invoer.txt | programma.exe
Your program works, but is not that efficient and personally I find it not that elegant (sorry :S) because you introduce a lot of "noise". As a result it takes a lot of time before output is written.
If I understand the problem statement correctly, each line (except the first), contains two integers, and you need to count the amount of prime numbers between these two numbers (bounds inclusive?)
First of all, you can do this more elegantly by defining a function: cPrime :: Int -> Int -> Int that takes as input the two numbers and returns the amount of prime numbers:
cPrime :: Int -> Int -> Int
cPrime a b = count $ filter isPrime [a .. b]
You can improve performance by improving your prime checking algorithm. First of all, you do not need to check whether 1 is a divisor, since 1 is always a divisor. Furthermore, you can prove mathematically that there is no divisor greater than sqrt(n) (except for n) that divides n; unless there is another divider that is smaller than sqrt(n). So that means that you can simply enumerate all numbers between 2 and sqrt n and from the moment one of these is a divisor, you can stop: you have proven the number is not prime:
isPrime :: Int -> Bool
isPrime 1 = False
isPrime 2 = True
isPrime n = all ((0 /=) . mod n) (2:[3,5..m])
where m = floor $ sqrt $ fromIntegral n
Now I'm not sure what you aim to do with kleinsteVerschilF.
I want to display some Rational values in their decimal expansion. That is, instead of displaying 3 % 4, I would rather display 0.75. I'd like this function to be of type Int -> Rational -> String. The first Int is to specify the maximum number of decimal places, since Rational expansions may be non-terminating.
Hoogle and the haddocks for Data.Ratio didn't help me. Where can I find this function?
You can make it. Not elegant, but does the job:
import Numeric
import Data.Ratio
display :: Int -> Rational -> String
display n x = (showFFloat (Just n) $ fromRat x) ""
Here is an arbitrary precision solution that doesn't use floats:
import Data.Ratio
display :: Int -> Rational -> String
display len rat = (if num < 0 then "-" else "") ++ (shows d ("." ++ take len (go next)))
where
(d, next) = abs num `quotRem` den
num = numerator rat
den = denominator rat
go 0 = ""
go x = let (d, next) = (10 * x) `quotRem` den
in shows d (go next)
Arbitrary precision version that re-uses library code:
import Data.Number.CReal
display :: Int -> Rational -> String
display digits num = showCReal digits (fromRational num)
I know I've seen a function before that converts rationals into digits in a way that's easier to inspect (i.e. that makes it quite clear where the digits start repeating), but I can't seem to find it now. In any case, it's not hard to write, if that turns out to be a need; you just code up the usual long-division algorithm and watch for divisions you've already done.
Here's one that I wrote a few weeks ago. You can specify the number of decimals you want (correctly rounded), or just pass Nothing in which case it will print the full precision, including marking the repeated decimals.
module ShowRational where
import Data.List(findIndex, splitAt)
-- | Convert a 'Rational' to a 'String' using the given number of decimals.
-- If the number of decimals is not given the full precision is showed using (DDD) for repeating digits.
-- E.g., 13.7/3 is shown as \"4.5(6)\".
showRational :: Maybe Int -> Rational -> String
showRational (Just n) r =
let d = round (abs r * 10^n)
s = show (d :: Integer)
s' = replicate (n - length s + 1) '0' ++ s
(h, f) = splitAt (length s' - n) s'
in (if r < 0 then "-" else "") ++ h ++ "." ++ f
-- The length of the repeating digits is related to the totient function of the denominator.
-- This means that the complexity of computing them is at least as bad as factoring, i.e., it quickly becomes infeasible.
showRational Nothing r =
let (i, f) = properFraction (abs r) :: (Integer, Rational)
si = if r < 0 then "-" ++ show i else show i
decimals f = loop f [] ""
loop x fs ds =
if x == 0 then
ds
else
case findIndex (x ==) fs of
Just i -> let (l, r) = splitAt i ds in l ++ "(" ++ r ++ ")"
Nothing -> let (c, f) = properFraction (10 * x) :: (Integer, Rational) in loop f (fs ++ [x]) (ds ++ show c)
in if f == 0 then si else si ++ "." ++ decimals f
import Data.List as L
import Data.Ratio
display :: (Integral i, Show i) => Int -> Ratio i -> String
display len rat = (if num < 0 then "-" else "") ++ show ip ++ "." ++ L.take len (go (abs num - ip * den))
where
num = numerator rat
den = denominator rat
ip = abs num `quot` den
go 0 = ""
go x = shows d (go next)
where
(d, next) = (10 * x) `quotRem` den
I have to write two functions converting decimal numers into a (-2)adian number system (similar to binary only with -2) and vice versa.
I already have managed to get the decimal -> (-2)adian running.
But with (-2)adian -> decimal I have a problem and just don't know where to begin.
Hope you can Help me
type NegaBinary = String
-- Function (-2)adisch --> decimal
negbin_dezi :: NegaBinary -> Integer -> Integer
negbin_dezi (xs:x) n
| (x == 0) = if ([xs] == "") then 0 else (negbin_dezi [xs] (n+1))
| (x == 1) = if ([xs] == "") then (-2)**n else (-2)**n + (negbin_dezi [xs] (n+1))
It always throws:
"Instances of (Num [Char], Floating Integer) required for definition of negbin_dezi.
Anyone an idea why it wont work?
Please please please :)
You have your list pattern-matching syntax backwards. In _ : _ the first argument is the head of the list (one element), and the second is the tail of the list (another list). e.g. x:xs matched with "abc" gives x = 'a' xs = "bc". So xs:x should be x:xs. The reason for GHC asking for an instance of Num [Char], is the comparison x == 0 (and x == 1). In this, it is trying to match the type of x (String == [Char]) with the type of 0 (Num a => a), and to do this, it requires a Num instance for String.
The fix is: negbin_dezi (x:xs) n
The problem asking for an Floating Integer instance is because (**) has type Floating a => a -> a -> a, where as you want (^) which has type (Num a, Integral b) => a -> b -> a (i.e. it is restricted to integer powers.)
Once you've done this, you'll find that your algorithm doesn't work for a few reasons:
The number 0 is different to the character '0', you should be comparing x with the characters '0' and '1' rather than the numbers 0 and 1.
xs is already a string, so [xs] is a list containing a string, which isn't what you want. This is fixed by removing the square brackets.
Possibly the ordering of the reduction is wrong.
On a different note, the duplicated if statement suggests that there is some optimisations that could happen with your code. Specifically, if you handle the empty string as part of negbin_dezi then you won't have to special case it. You could write it something like
negbin_dezi "" _ = 0
negbin_dezi (x:xs) n
| n == '0' = negbin_dezi xs (n+1)
| n == '1' = (-2)^n + negbin_dezi
(This has the bonus of meaning that the function is "more total", i.e. it is defined on more inputs.)
A few more things:
The code is "stringly-typed": your data is being represented as a string, despite having more structure. A list of booleans ([Bool]) would be much better.
The algorithm can be adapted to be cleaner. For the following, I'm assuming you are storing it like "01" = -2 "001" = 4, etc. If so, then we know that number = a + (-2) * b + (-2)^2 * c ... = a + (-2) * (b + (-2) * (c + ...)) where a,b,c,... are the digits. Looking at this, we can see the stuff inside the brackets is actually the same as the whole expression, just starting at the second digit. This is easy to express in Haskell (I'm using the list-of-bools idea.):
negbin [] = 0
negbin (x:xs) = (if x then 1 else 0) + (-2) * negbin xs
And that's the whole thing. If you aren't storing it in that order, then a call to reverse fixes that! (Being really tricky, one could write
negbin = foldr (\x n -> (if x then 1 else 0) + (-2)*n) 0
)
Some problems:
x == 0 or x == 1, but x is a Char, so you mean x == '0'.
You write (xs:x). There's no pattern for matching at the end of a list. Perhaps use a helper function that reverses the list first.
[xs] has one element, and will never be "". Use a base case instead.
Pattern matching is more helpful than equality checking.
** is for floating point powers, ^ is for integer powers
You often use [xs] where you mean xs. You don't need to put square brackets to make a list.
Here's a rewrite that works:
negbin_dezi1 :: NegaBinary -> Integer
negbin_dezi1 xs = negbin (reverse xs) 0
negbin [] _ = 0
negbin (x:xs) n
| x == '0' = negbin xs (n+1)
| x == '1' = (-2)^n + (negbin xs (n+1))
It would be nicer to use pattern matching:
negbin_dezi2 :: NegaBinary -> Integer
negbin_dezi2 xs = negbin (reverse xs) 0 where
negbin [] _ = 0
negbin ('0':xs) n = negbin xs (n+1)
negbin ('1':xs) n = (-2)^n + negbin xs (n+1)
But maybe it would be nicer to convert '0' to 0 and '1' to 1 and just multiply by that:
val :: Char -> Int
val '0' = 0
val '1' = 1
negbin_dezi3 :: NegaBinary -> Integer
negbin_dezi3 xs = negbin (reverse xs) 0 where
negbin [] _ = 0
negbin (x:xs) n = val x * (-2)^n + negbin xs (n+1)
I'd not write it that way, though:
A completely different approach is to think about the whole thing at once.
"10010" -rev> [0,1,0,0,1] -means> [ 0, 1, 0, 0, 1 ]
[(-2)^0, (-2)^1, (-2)^2, (-2)^3, (-2)^4]
so let's make both lists
powers = [(-2)^n | n <- [0..]]
coefficients = reverse.map val $ xs
and multiply them
zipWith (*) powers coefficients
then add up, giving:
negbin_dezi4 xs = sum $ zipWith (*) powers coefficients
where powers = [(-2)^n | n <- [0..]]
coefficients = reverse.map val $ xs
You could rewrite powers as map ((-2)^) [0..],
or even nicer: powers = 1:map ((-2)*) powers.
(It's nicer because it reuses previous calculations and is pleasantly clean.)
this
convB2D::NegaBinary->Integer
convB2D xs|(length xs)==0 =0
|b=='0' = convB2D(drop 1 xs)
|b=='1' = val+convB2D(drop 1 xs)
|otherwise= error "invalid character "
where b=head xs
val=(-2)^((length xs)-1)
worked for me.
I on the other hand have problems to convert dec->nbin :D
I am doing another Project Euler problem and I need to find when the result of these 3 lists is equal (we are given 40755 as the first time they are equal, I need to find the next:
hexag n = [ n*(2*n-1) | n <- [40755..]]
penta n = [ n*(3*n-1)/2 | n <- [40755..]]
trian n = [ n*(n+1)/2 | n <- [40755..]]
I tried adding in the other lists as predicates of the first list, but that didn't work:
hexag n = [ n*(2*n-1) | n <- [40755..], penta n == n, trian n == n]
I am stuck as to where to to go from here.
I tried graphing the function and even calculus but to no avail, so I must resort to a Haskell solution.
Your functions are weird. They get n and then ignore it?
You also have a confusion between function's inputs and outputs. The 40755th hexagonal number is 3321899295, not 40755.
If you really want a spoiler to the problem (but doesn't that miss the point?):
binarySearch :: Integral a => (a -> Bool) -> a -> a -> a
binarySearch func low high
| low == high = low
| func mid = search low mid
| otherwise = search (mid + 1) high
where
search = binarySearch func
mid = (low+high) `div` 2
infiniteBinarySearch :: Integral a => (a -> Bool) -> a
infiniteBinarySearch func =
binarySearch func ((lim+1) `div` 2) lim
where
lim = head . filter func . lims $ 0
lims x = x:lims (2*x+1)
inIncreasingSerie :: (Ord a, Integral i) => (i -> a) -> a -> Bool
inIncreasingSerie func val =
val == func (infiniteBinarySearch ((>= val) . func))
figureNum :: Integer -> Integer -> Integer
figureNum shape index = (index*((shape-2)*index+4-shape)) `div` 2
main :: IO ()
main =
print . head . filter r $ map (figureNum 6) [144..]
where
r x = inIncreasingSerie (figureNum 5) x && inIncreasingSerie (figureNum 3) x
Here's a simple, direct answer to exactly the question you gave:
*Main> take 1 $ filter (\(x,y,z) -> (x == y) && (y == z)) $ zip3 [1,2,3] [4,2,6] [8,2,9]
[(2,2,2)]
Of course, yairchu's answer might be more useful in actually solving the Euler question :)
There's at least a couple ways you can do this.
You could look at the first item, and compare the rest of the items to it:
Prelude> (\x -> all (== (head x)) $ tail x) [ [1,2,3], [1,2,3], [4,5,6] ]
False
Prelude> (\x -> all (== (head x)) $ tail x) [ [1,2,3], [1,2,3], [1,2,3] ]
True
Or you could make an explicitly recursive function similar to the previous:
-- test.hs
f [] = True
f (x:xs) = f' x xs where
f' orig (y:ys) = if orig == y then f' orig ys else False
f' _ [] = True
Prelude> :l test.hs
[1 of 1] Compiling Main ( test.hs, interpreted )
Ok, modules loaded: Main.
*Main> f [ [1,2,3], [1,2,3], [1,2,3] ]
True
*Main> f [ [1,2,3], [1,2,3], [4,5,6] ]
False
You could also do a takeWhile and compare the length of the returned list, but that would be neither efficient nor typically Haskell.
Oops, just saw that didn't answer your question at all. Marking this as CW in case anyone stumbles upon your question via Google.
The easiest way is to respecify your problem slightly
Rather than deal with three lists (note the removal of the superfluous n argument):
hexag = [ n*(2*n-1) | n <- [40755..]]
penta = [ n*(3*n-1)/2 | n <- [40755..]]
trian = [ n*(n+1)/2 | n <- [40755..]]
You could, for instance generate one list:
matches :: [Int]
matches = matches' 40755
matches' :: Int -> [Int]
matches' n
| hex == pen && pen == tri = n : matches (n + 1)
| otherwise = matches (n + 1) where
hex = n*(2*n-1)
pen = n*(3*n-1)/2
tri = n*(n+1)/2
Now, you could then try to optimize this for performance by noticing recurrences. For instance when computing the next match at (n + 1):
(n+1)*(n+2)/2 - n*(n+1)/2 = n + 1
so you could just add (n + 1) to the previous tri to obtain the new tri value.
Similar algebraic simplifications can be applied to the other two functions, and you can carry all of them in accumulating parameters to the function matches'.
That said, there are more efficient ways to tackle this problem.