I have a list like this:
[(2,3),(2,5),(2,7),(3,2),(3,4),(3,6),(4,3),(4,5),(4,7),(5,2),(5,4),(5,6),(6,3),(6,5),(6,7),(7,2),(7,4),(7,6)]
The digits are from [2..7]. I want to take a set where there are any symmetrical pairs. e.g. [(1,2),(2,1)], but those two numbers aren't used again in the set. An example would be:
[(3,6),(6,3),(2,5),(5,2),(4,7),(7,4)]
I wanted to first put symmetric pairs together as I thought it might be easier to work with so i created this function, which actually creates the pairs and puts them in another list
g xs = [ (y,x):(x,y):[] | (x,y) <- xs ]
with which the list turns to this:
[[(3,2),(2,3)],[(5,2),(2,5)],[(7,2),(2,7)],[(2,3),(3,2)],[(4,3),(3,4)],[(6,3),(3,6)],[(3,4),(4,3)],[(5,4),(4,5)],[(7,4),(4,7)],[(2,5),(5,2)],[(4,5),(5,4)],[(6,5),(5,6)],[(3,6),(6,3)],[(5,6),(6,5)],[(7,6),(6,7)],[(2,7),(7,2)],[(4,7),(7,4)],[(6,7),(7,6)]]
Then from here I was hoping to somehow remove duplicates.
I made a function that will look at all of the fst elements of all of the pairs:
flatList xss = [ x | xs <- xss, (x,y) <- xs ]
to use with another function to remove the duplicates.
h (x:xs) | (fst (head x)) `elem` (flatList xs) = h xs
| otherwise = (head x):(last x):(h xs)
which gives me the list
[(3,6),(6,3),(5,6),(6,5),(2,7),(7,2),(4,7),(7,4),(6,7),(7,6)]
which has duplicate numbers. That function only takes into account the first element of the first pair in the list of lists,the problem is when I also take into account the first element of the second pair (or the second element of the first pair):
h (x:xs) | (fst (head x)) `elem` (flatList xs) || (fst (last x)) `elem` (flatList xs) = h xs
| otherwise = (head x):(last x):(h xs)
I only get these two pairs:
[(6,7),(7,6)]
I see that the problem is that this method of deleting duplicates grabs the last repeated element, and would work with a list of digits, but not a list of pairs, as it misses pairs it needs to take.
Is there another way to solve this, or an alteration I could make?
It probably makes more sense to use a 2-tuple of 2-tuples in your list comprehension, since that makes it more easy to do pattern matching, and thus "by contract" enforces the fact that there are two items. We thus can construct 2-tuples that contain the 2-tuples with:
g :: Eq a => [(a, a)] -> [((a, a), (a, a))]
g xs = [ (t, s) | (t#(x,y):ts) <- tails xs, let s = (y, x), elem s ts ]
Here the elem s ts checks if the "swapped" 2-tuple occurs in the rest of the list.
Then we still need to filter the elements. We can make use of a function that uses an accumulator for the thus far obtained items:
h :: Eq a => [((a, a), (a, a))] -> [(a, a)]
h = go []
where go _ [] = []
go seen ((t#(x, y), s):xs)
| notElem x seen && notElem y seen = t : s : go (x:y:seen) xs
| otherwise = go seen xs
For the given sample input, we thus get:
Prelude Data.List> (h . g) [(2,3),(2,5),(2,7),(3,2),(3,4),(3,6),(4,3),(4,5),(4,7),(5,2),(5,4),(5,6),(6,3),(6,5),(6,7),(7,2),(7,4),(7,6)]
[(2,3),(3,2),(4,5),(5,4),(6,7),(7,6)]
after reading a few times your question, I got an elegant solution to your problem. Thinking that if you have a list of pairs without any repeated number, you can get the list of swapped pairs easily, solving your problem. So your problem can be reduce to given a list, get the list of all pairs using each number just one.
For a given list, there are many solutions to this, ex: for [1,2,3,4] valid solutions are: [(2,4),(4,2),(1,3),(3,1)] and [(2,3),(3,2),(1,4),(4,1)], etc... The approach here is:
take a permutation if the original list (say [1,4,3,2])
pick one element for each half and pair them together (for simplicity, you can pick consecutive elements too)
for each pair, create a the swapped pair and put all together
By doing so you end up with a list of non repeating numbers of pairs and its symmetric. More over, looping around all permutaitons, you can get all the solutions to your problem.
import Data.List (permutations, splitAt)
import Data.Tuple (swap)
-- This function splits a list by the half of the length
splitHalf :: [a] -> ([a], [a])
splitHalf xs = splitAt (length xs `quot` 2) xs
-- This zip a pair of list into a list of pairs
zipHalfs :: ([a], [a]) -> [(a,a)]
zipHalfs (xs, ys) = zip xs ys
-- Given a list of tuples, creates a larger list with all tuples and all swapped tuples
makeSymetrics :: [(a,a)] -> [(a,a)]
makeSymetrics xs = foldr (\t l -> t:(swap t):l) [] xs
-- This chain all of the above.
-- Take all permutations of xs >>> for each permutations >>> split it in two >>> zip the result >>> make swapped pairs
getPairs :: [a] -> [[(a,a)]]
getPairs xs = map (makeSymetrics . zipHalfs . splitHalf) $ permutations xs
>>> getPairs [1,2,3,4]
[[(1,3),(3,1),(2,4),(4,2)],[(2,3),(3,2),(1,4),(4,1)] ....
How do I manually split [1,2,4,5,6,7] into [[1],[2],[3],[4],[5],[6],[7]]? Manually means without using break.
Then, how do I split a list into sublists according to a predicate? Like so
f even [[1],[2],[3],[4],[5],[6],[7]] == [[1],[2,3],[4,5],[6,7]]
PS: this is not homework, and I've tried for hours to figure it out on my own.
To answer your first question, this is rather an element-wise transformation than a split. The appropriate function to do this is
map :: (a -> b) -> [a] -> [b]
Now, you need a function (a -> b) where b is [a], as you want to transform an element into a singleton list containing the same type. Here it is:
mkList :: a -> [a]
mkList a = [a]
so
map mkList [1,2,3,4,5,6,7] == [[1],[2],...]
As for your second question: If you are not allowed (homework?) to use break, are you then allowed to use takeWhile and dropWhile which form both halves of the result of break.
Anyway, for a solution without them ("manually"), just use simple recursion with an accumulator:
f p [] = []
f p (x:xs) = go [x] xs
where go acc [] = [acc]
go acc (y:ys) | p y = acc : go [y] ys
| otherwise = go (acc++[y]) ys
This will traverse your entire list tail recursively, always remembering what the current sublist is, and when you reach an element where p applies, outputting the current sublist and starting a new one.
Note that go first receives [x] instead of [] to provide for the case where the first element already satisfies p x and we don't want an empty first sublist to be output.
Also, this operates on the original list ([1..7]) instead of [[1],[2]...]. But you can use it on the transformed one as well:
> map concat $ f (odd . head) [[1],[2],[3],[4],[5],[6],[7]]
[[1,2],[3,4],[5,6],[7]]
For the first, you can use a list comprehension:
>>> [[x] | x <- [1,2,3,4,5,6]]
[[1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6]]
For the second problem, you can use the Data.List.Split module provided by the split package:
import Data.List.Split
f :: (a -> Bool) -> [[a]] -> [[a]]
f predicate = split (keepDelimsL $ whenElt predicate) . concat
This first concats the list, because the functions from split work on lists and not list of lists. The resulting single list is the split again using functions from the split package.
First:
map (: [])
Second:
f p xs =
let rs = foldr (\[x] ~(a:r) -> if (p x) then ([]:(x:a):r) else ((x:a):r))
[[]] xs
in case rs of ([]:r) -> r ; _ -> rs
foldr's operation is easy enough to visualize:
foldr g z [a,b,c, ...,x] = g a (g b (g c (.... (g x z) ....)))
So when writing the combining function, it is expecting two arguments, 1st of which is "current element" of a list, and 2nd is "result of processing the rest". Here,
g [x] ~(a:r) | p x = ([]:(x:a):r)
| otherwise = ((x:a):r)
So visualizing it working from the right, it just adds into the most recent sublist, and opens up a new sublist if it must. But since lists are actually accessed from the left, we keep it lazy with the lazy pattern, ~(a:r). Now it works even on infinite lists:
Prelude> take 9 $ f odd $ map (:[]) [1..]
[[1,2],[3,4],[5,6],[7,8],[9,10],[11,12],[13,14],[15,16],[17,18]]
The pattern for the 1st argument reflects the peculiar structure of your expected input lists.
how can i get the most frequent value in a list example:
[1,3,4,5,6,6] -> output 6
[1,3,1,5] -> output 1
Im trying to get it by my own functions but i cant achieve it can you guys help me?
my code:
del x [] = []
del x (y:ys) = if x /= y
then y:del x y
else del x ys
obj x []= []
obj x (y:ys) = if x== y then y:obj x y else(obj x ys)
tam [] = 0
tam (x:y) = 1+tam y
fun (n1:[]) (n:[]) [] =n1
fun (n1:[]) (n:[]) (x:s) =if (tam(obj x (x:s)))>n then fun (x:[]) ((tam(obj x (x:s))):[]) (del x (x:s)) else(fun (n1:[]) (n:[]) (del x (x:s)))
rep (x:s) = fun (x:[]) ((tam(obj x (x:s))):[]) (del x (x:s))
Expanding on Satvik's last suggestion, you can use (&&&) :: (b -> c) -> (b -> c') -> (b -> (c, c')) from Control.Arrow (Note that I substituted a = (->) in that type signature for simplicity) to cleanly perform a decorate-sort-undecorate transform.
mostCommon list = fst . maximumBy (compare `on` snd) $ elemCount
where elemCount = map (head &&& length) . group . sort $ list
The head &&& length function has type [b] -> (b, Int). It converts a list into a tuple of its first element and its length, so when it is combined with group . sort you get a list of each distinct value in the list along with the number of times it occurred.
Also, you should think about what happens when you call mostCommon []. Clearly there is no sensible value, since there is no element at all. As it stands, all the solutions proposed (including mine) just fail on an empty list, which is not good Haskell. The normal thing to do would be to return a Maybe a, where Nothing indicates an error (in this case, an empty list) and Just a represents a "real" return value. e.g.
mostCommon :: Ord a => [a] -> Maybe a
mostCommon [] = Nothing
mostCommon list = Just ... -- your implementation here
This is much nicer, as partial functions (functions that are undefined for some input values) are horrible from a code-safety point of view. You can manipulate Maybe values using pattern matching (matching on Nothing and Just x) and the functions in Data.Maybe (preferable fromMaybe and maybe rather than fromJust).
In case you would like to get some ideas from code that does what you wish to achieve, here is an example:
import Data.List (nub, maximumBy)
import Data.Function (on)
mostCommonElem list = fst $ maximumBy (compare `on` snd) elemCounts where
elemCounts = nub [(element, count) | element <- list, let count = length (filter (==element) list)]
Here are few suggestions
del can be implemented using filter rather than writing your own recursion. In your definition there was a mistake, you needed to give ys and not y while deleting.
del x = filter (/=x)
obj is similar to del with different filter function. Similarly here in your definition you need to give ys and not y in obj.
obj x = filter (==x)
tam is just length function
-- tam = length
You don't need to keep a list for n1 and n. I have also made your code more readable, although I have not made any changes to your algorithm.
fun n1 n [] =n1
fun n1 n xs#(x:s) | length (obj x xs) > n = fun x (length $ obj x xs) (del x xs)
| otherwise = fun n1 n $ del x xs
rep xs#(x:s) = fun x (length $ obj x xs) (del x xs)
Another way, not very optimal but much more readable is
import Data.List
import Data.Ord
rep :: Ord a => [a] -> a
rep = head . head . sortBy (flip $ comparing length) . group . sort
I will try to explain in short what this code is doing. You need to find the most frequent element of the list so the first idea that should come to mind is to find frequency of all the elements. Now group is a function which combines adjacent similar elements.
> group [1,2,2,3,3,3,1,2,4]
[[1],[2,2],[3,3,3],[1],[2],[4]]
So I have used sort to bring elements which are same adjacent to each other
> sort [1,2,2,3,3,3,1,2,4]
[1,1,2,2,2,3,3,3,4]
> group . sort $ [1,2,2,3,3,3,1,2,4]
[[1,1],[2,2,2],[3,3,3],[4]]
Finding element with the maximum frequency just reduces to finding the sublist with largest number of elements. Here comes the function sortBy with which you can sort based on given comparing function. So basically I have sorted on length of the sublists (The flip is just to make the sorting descending rather than ascending).
> sortBy (flip $ comparing length) . group . sort $ [1,2,2,3,3,3,1,2,4]
[[2,2,2],[3,3,3],[1,1],[4]]
Now you can just take head two times to get the element with the largest frequency.
Let's assume you already have argmax function. You can write
your own or even better, you can reuse list-extras package. I strongly suggest you
to take a look at the package anyway.
Then, it's quite easy:
import Data.List.Extras.Argmax ( argmax )
-- >> mostFrequent [3,1,2,3,2,3]
-- 3
mostFrequent xs = argmax f xs
where f x = length $ filter (==x) xs