I have a function rep which requires a list with ints. My task now is to put each of these numbers in separate lists with n times the number. For example
[1,3,5] to [[1],[3,3,3],[5,5,5,5,5]] So far I can put each int in a separate list but I don't really now how to put them n times in the list without using replicate or repeat.
This is the code I have so far:
rep [] = []
rep (x1:xs) = [[x1]] ++ (rep xs)
As this is a homework/learning exercise - just want to give some hints
Split the task in two parts a function
myReplicate :: Int -> a -> [a] which replicates a single element as many times as the Int tells it to.
myReplicate n x | n > 0 = ...
| n == 0 = ...
| n < 0 = error "Error myReplicate: no negative arguments allowed"
a second function myMap :: (a -> b) -> [a] -> [b] that applies a function to every element of a given list.
myMap :: (a -> b) -> [a] -> [b]
myMap f [] = []
myMap f (x:xs) = ...
then rep = myMap (\x -> myReplicate x x)
Here a solution without repeat or replicate:
rep = map (\ n -> foldr (const (n :)) [] [1..n])
Related
I'm currently trying to write a function that takes as arguments an Int and an array of Ints and for every even value in the array, it concatenates the Int to the final array.
So, something like this:
f 3 [1,2,3,4,5,6] = [1,2,3,3,4,3,5,6,3]
This is the code I imagined would work (I'm just beginning so sorry if it's bad):
f :: Int -> [Int] -> [Int]
f(x,[]) = []
f(x,y)
|even head(y) = (head(y) ++ [x] ++ f(x,drop 1 y)
|otherwise = head(y) ++ f(x,(drop 1 y))
The error I'm getting is "Couldn't match expected type of 'Int' with actual type (a3, [[a3]])'. I understand the parameters types are mismatched, but I'm not sure how a proper syntax would look like here
You use (x, []), so that means the input type would be a tuple, so f :: (Int, [Int]) -> [Int].
I would also use pattern matching instead of head and tail, so:
f :: Int -> [Int] -> [Int]
f _ [] = []
f x (y:ys)
| even y = y : x : f x ys
| otherwise = y : f x ys
You can also generalize the type signature, and work with an inner function to avoid passing the x each time:
f :: Integral a => a -> [a] -> [a]
f x = go
where go [] = []
go (y:ys)
| even y = y : x : go ys
| otherwise = y : go ys
Another way of looking at this would be using a right fold to insert the desired element after even numbers.
f :: Int -> [Int] -> [Int]
f x lst = foldr (\y i -> if even y then y:x:i else y:i) [] lst
Which we can simplify to:
f :: Int -> [Int] -> [Int]
f x = foldr (\y i -> if even y then y:x:i else y:i) []
Note that without specifying the type, the more general inferred type of f would be:
f :: (Foldable t, Integral a) => a -> t a -> [a]
I would like to define a greaters function, which selects from a list items that are larger than the one before it.
For instance:
greaters [1,3,2,4,3,4,5] == [3,4,4,5]
greaters [5,10,6,11,7,12] == [10,11,12]
The definition I came up with is this :
greaters :: Ord a => [a] -> [a]
Things I tried so far:
greaters (x:xs) = group [ d | d <- xs, x < xs ]
Any tips?
We can derive a foldr-based solution by a series of re-writes starting from the hand-rolled recursive solution in the accepted answer:
greaters :: Ord a => [a] -> [a]
greaters [] = []
greaters (x:xs) = go x xs -- let's re-write this clause
where
go _ [] = []
go last (act:xs)
| last < act = act : go act xs
| otherwise = go act xs
greaters (x:xs) = go xs x -- swap the arguments
where
go [] _ = []
go (act:xs) last
| last < act = act : go xs act
| otherwise = go xs act
greaters (x:xs) = foldr g z xs x -- go ==> foldr g z
where
foldr g z [] _ = []
foldr g z (act:xs) last
| last < act = act : foldr g z xs act
| otherwise = foldr g z xs act
greaters (x:xs) = foldr g z xs x
where -- simplify according to
z _ = [] -- foldr's definition
g act (foldr g z xs) last
| last < act = act : foldr g z xs act
| otherwise = foldr g z xs act
Thus, with one last re-write of foldr g z xs ==> r,
greaters (x:xs) = foldr g z xs x
where
z = const []
g act r last
| last < act = act : r act
| otherwise = r act
The extra parameter serves as a state being passed forward as we go along the input list, the state being the previous element; thus avoiding the construction by zip of the shifted-pairs list serving the same purpose.
I would start from here:
greaters :: Ord a => [a] -> [a]
greaters [] = []
greaters (x:xs) = greatersImpl x xs
where
greatersImpl last [] = <fill this out>
greatersImpl last (x:xs) = <fill this out>
The following functions are everything you’d need for one possible solution :)
zip :: [a] -> [b] -> [(a, b)]
drop 1 :: [a] -> [a]
filter :: (a -> Bool) -> [a] -> [a]
(<) :: Ord a => a -> a -> Bool
uncurry :: (a -> b -> c) -> (a, b) -> c
map :: (a -> b) -> [a] -> [b]
snd :: (a, b) -> b
Note: drop 1 can be used when you’d prefer a “safe” version of tail.
If you like over-generalization like me, you can use the witherable package.
{-# language ScopedTypeVariables #-}
import Control.Monad.State.Lazy
import Data.Witherable
{-
class (Traversable t, Filterable t) => Witherable t where
-- `wither` is an effectful version of mapMaybe.
wither :: Applicative f => (a -> f (Maybe b)) -> t a -> f (t b)
-}
greaters
:: forall t a. (Ord a, Witherable t)
=> t a -> t a
greaters xs = evalState (wither go xs) Nothing
where
go :: a -> State (Maybe a) (Maybe a)
go curr = do
st <- get
put (Just curr)
pure $ case st of
Nothing -> Nothing
Just prev ->
if curr > prev
then Just curr
else Nothing
The state is the previous element, if there is one. Everything is about as lazy as it can be. In particular:
If the container is a Haskell list, then it can be an infinite one and everything will still work. The beginning of the list can be produced without withering the rest.
If the container extends infinitely to the left (e.g., an infinite snoc list), then everything will still work. How can that be? We only need to know what was in the previous element to work out the state for the current element.
"Roll your own recursive function" is certainly an option here, but it can also be accomplished with a fold. filter can't do it because we need some sort of state being passed, but fold can nicely accumulate the result while keeping that state at the same time.
Of course the key idea is that we keep track of last element add the next one to the result set if it's greater than the last one.
greaters :: [Int] -> [Int]
greaters [] = []
greaters (h:t) = reverse . snd $ foldl (\(a, r) x -> (x, if x > a then x:r else r)) (h, []) t
I'd really love to eta-reduce it but since we're dropping the first element and seeding the accumulator with it it kinda becomes awkward with the empty list; still, this is effectively an one-liner.
So i have come up with a foldr solution. It should be similar to what #Will Ness has demonstrated but not quite i suppose as we don't need a separate empty list check in this one.
The thing is, while folding we need to encapsulate the previous element and also the state (the result) in a function type. So in the go helper function f is the state (the result) c is the current element of interest and p is the previous one (next since we are folding right). While folding from right to left we are nesting up these functions only to run it by applyying the head of the input list to it.
go :: Ord a => a -> (a -> [a]) -> (a -> [a])
go c f = \p -> let r = f c
in if c > p then c:r else r
greaters :: Ord a => [a] -> [a]
greaters = foldr go (const []) <*> head
*Main> greaters [1,3,2,4,3,4,5]
[3,4,4,5]
*Main> greaters [5,10,6,11,7,12]
[10,11,12]
*Main> greaters [651,151,1651,21,651,1231,4,1,16,135,87]
[1651,651,1231,16,135]
*Main> greaters [1]
[]
*Main> greaters []
[]
As per rightful comments of #Will Ness here is a modified slightly more general code which hopefully doesn't break suddenly when the comparison changes. Note that const [] :: b -> [a] is the initial function and [] is the terminator applied to the result of foldr. We don't need Maybe since [] can easily do the job of Nothing here.
gs :: Ord a => [a] -> [a]
gs xs = foldr go (const []) xs $ []
where
go :: Ord a => a -> ([a] -> [a]) -> ([a] -> [a])
go c f = \ps -> let r = f [c]
in case ps of
[] -> r
[p] -> if c > p then c:r else r
Ok so i want to implement my custom map that receives a replication factor and a target list.
Inputs: Int -> [Int]
Output: [[Int]]
E.g.: 2 [1,2] -----> [[1,1],[2,2]]
f [1,2,3] -> map -> [f(1),f(2),f(3)]
What is supposed to happen with f(1) when map goes to the next element of the list?How should i replace 1 with f(1) ?
P.S: This was my initial solution but it does replicate the initial list,not every element.
replicate::Int->[Int]->[[Int]]
replicate 1 x=x
replicate factor (x:xs)= go factor [] (x:xs) where
go factor ls (x:xs) =go factor (repl factor x):ls xs
repl 1 nr=nr
repl times nr=nr:repl (times-1) nr
There are two issues, that prevent your code from compiling:
null function has the type [a0] -> Bool, but you're applying it
on an element of a list, hence you're expecting it to be Int -> Bool
The result f x shouldn't be pushed into the tail of the input, it
should be pushed into the result of recursive call of the function:
f x: (mymap f xs) instead of f x: xs
As a result the following code should work:
mymap :: (Int -> [Int]) -> [Int]-> [[Int]]
mymap f (x:xs) = if null xs then [] else f x : (mymap f xs)
By the way, the Standard Library provides much readable (and also polymorphic) implementation using pattern-matching:
map :: (a -> b) -> [a] -> [b]
map _ [] = []
map f (x:xs) = f x : map f xs
custom map that receives a replication factor and a target list
It is a little unclear to me what you're asking for.
Does mymap receive the replication factor, or does f?
E.g.: 2 [1,2] -----> [[1,1],[2,2]]
If you want mymap 2 [1,2] to give [[1,1],[2,2]], then:
mymap :: Int -> [a] -> [[a]]
mymap = map . replicate
However,
mymap :: (Int -> [Int]) -> [Int] -> [[Int]]
How is this function any different from the built-in map :: (a -> b) -> [a] -> [b] with a as Int and b as [Int]? Here, mymap does not have any Int argument itself, so you must mean that f's argument is the replication factor; but if f 2 3 == [3,3], then f is replicate and you can use the solution above.
You can write this using your own recursive definitions, if you like:
mymap :: Int -> [a] -> [[a]]
mymap _ [] = []
mymap n (x:xs) = myreplicate n x : mymap n xs
myreplicate :: Int -> a -> [a]
myreplicate 0 _ = []
myreplicate n x = x : myreplicate (n-1) x
Or you can use list comprehension instead of a map:
mymap :: Int -> [a] -> [[a]]
mymap n xs = [ replicate n x | x <- xs ]
I'd probably call mymap for replicateMany or something like that.
I want to make a sudoku solver in Haskell (as an exercise). My idea is:
I have t :: [[Int]] representing a 9x9 grid so that it contains 0 in an empty field and 1-9 in a solved field.
A function solve :: [[Int]] -> [[Int]] returns the solved sudoku.
Here is a rough sketch of it (i'd like to point out i'm a beginner, i know it is not the most optimal code):
solve :: [[Int]] -> [[Int]]
solve t
| null (filter (elem 0) t) = t
| t /= beSmart t = solve (beSmart t)
| otherwise = guess t
The function beSmart :: [[Int]] -> [[Int]] tries to solve it by applying some solving algorithms, but if methodical approach fails (beSmart returns the unchanged sudoku table in that case) it should try to guess some numbers (and i'll think of that function later). In order to fill in an empty field, i have to find it first. And here's the problem:
beSmart :: [[Int]] -> [[Int]]
beSmart t = map f t
where f row
| elem 0 row = map unsolvedRow row
| otherwise = row
where unsolvedRow a
| a == 0 = tryToDo t r c --?!?!?!?! skip
| otherwise = a
The function tryToDo :: [[Int]]] -> Int -> Int - > Int needs the row and column of the field i'm trying to change, but i have no idea how to get that information. How do i get from map what element of the list i am in at the moment? Or is there a better way to move around in the table? I come from iterative and procedural programing and i understand that perhaps my approach to the problem is wrong when it comes to functional programing.
I know this is not really an answer to your question, but I would argue, that usually you would want a different representation (one that keeps a more detailed view of what you know about the sudoku puzzle, in your attempted solution you can only distinguish a solved cell from a cell that is free to assume any value). Sudoku is a classical instance of CSP. Where modern approaches offer many fairly general smart propagation rules, such as unit propagation (blocking a digit in neighboring cells once used somewhere), but also many other, see AC-3 for further details. Other related topics include SAT/SMT and you might find the algorithm DPLL also interesting. In the heart of most solvers there usually is some kind of a search engine to deal with non-determinism (not every instance must have a single solution that is directly derivable from the initial configuration of the instance by application of inference rules). There are also techniques such as CDCL to direct the search.
To address the question in the title, to know where you are, its probably best if you abstract the traversal of your table so that each step has access to the coordinates, you can for example zip a list of rows with [0..] (zip [0..] rows) to number the rows, when you then map a function over the zipped lists, you will have access to pairs (index, row), the same applies to columns. Just a sketch of the idea:
mapTable :: (Int -> Int -> a -> b) -> [[a]] -> [[b]]
mapTable f rows = map (\(r, rs) -> mapRow (f r) rs) $ zip [0..] rows
mapRow :: (Int -> a -> b) -> [a] -> [b]
mapRow f cols = map (uncurry f) $ zip [0..] cols
or use fold to turn your table into something else (for example to search for a unit cell):
foldrTable :: (Int -> Int -> a -> b -> b) -> b -> [[a]] -> b
foldrTable f z rows = foldr (\(r, rs) b -> foldrRow (f r) b rs) z $ zip [0..] rows
foldrRow :: (Int -> a -> b -> b) -> b -> [a] -> b
foldrRow f z cols = foldr (uncurry f) z $ zip [0..] cols
to find which cell is unital:
foldrTable
(\x y v acc -> if length v == 1 then Just (x, y) else acc)
Nothing
[[[1..9],[1..9],[1..9]],[[1..9],[1..9],[1..9]],[[1..9],[1],[1..9]]]
by using Monoid you can refactor it:
import Data.Monoid
foldrTable' :: Monoid b => (Int -> Int -> a -> b) -> [[a]] -> b
foldrTable' f rows = foldrTable (\r c a b -> b <> f r c a) mempty rows
unit :: Int -> Int -> [a] -> Maybe (Int, Int)
unit x y c | length c == 1 = Just (x, y)
| otherwise = Nothing
firstUnit :: [[[a]]] -> Maybe (Int, Int)
firstUnit = getFirst . foldrTable' (\r c v -> First $ unit r c v)
so now you would do
firstUnit [[[1..9],[1..9],[1..9]],[[1,2],[3,4],[5]]]
to obtain
Just (1, 2)
correctly determining that the first unit cell is at position 1,2 in the table.
[[Int]] is a good type for a sodoku. But map does not give any info regarding the place it is in. This is one of the ideas behind map.
You could zip together the index with the value. But a better idea would be to pass the whole [[Int]] and the indexes to to the function. So its type would become:
f :: [[Int]] -> Int -> Int -> [[Int]]
inside the function you can now access the current element by
t !! x !! y
Already did this a while ago as a learning example. It is definitely not the nicest solution, but it worked for me.
import Data.List
import Data.Maybe
import Data.Char
sodoku="\
\-9-----1-\
\8-4-2-3-7\
\-6-9-7-2-\
\--5-3-1--\
\-7-5-1-3-\
\--3-9-8--\
\-2-8-5-6-\
\1-7-6-4-9\
\-3-----8-"
sodoku2="\
\----13---\
\7-5------\
\1----547-\
\--418----\
\951-67843\
\-2---4--1\
\-6235-9-7\
\--7-98--4\
\89----1-5"
data Position = Position (Int, Int) deriving (Show)
data Sodoku = Sodoku [Int]
insertAtN :: Int -> a -> [a] -> [a]
insertAtN n y xs = intercalate [y] . groups n $ xs
where
groups n xs = takeWhile (not.null) . unfoldr (Just . splitAt n) $ xs
instance Show Sodoku where
show (Sodoku s) = (insertAtN 9 '\n' $ map intToDigit s) ++ "\n"
convertDigit :: Char -> Int
convertDigit x = case x of
'-' -> 0
x -> if digit>=1 && digit<=9 then
digit
else
0
where digit=digitToInt x
convertSodoku :: String -> Sodoku
convertSodoku x = Sodoku $ map convertDigit x
adjacentFields :: Position -> [Position]
adjacentFields (Position (x,y)) =
[Position (i,y) | i<-[0..8]] ++
[Position (x,j) | j<-[0..8]] ++
[Position (u+i,v+j) | i<-[0..2], j<-[0..2]]
where
u=3*(x `div` 3)
v=3*(y `div` 3)
positionToField :: Position -> Int
positionToField (Position (x,y)) = x+y*9
fieldToPosition :: Int -> Position
fieldToPosition x = Position (x `mod` 9, x `div` 9)
getDigit :: Sodoku -> Position -> Int
getDigit (Sodoku x) pos = x !! (positionToField pos )
getAdjacentDigits :: Sodoku -> Position -> [Int]
getAdjacentDigits s p = nub digitList
where
digitList=filter (\x->x/=0) $ map (getDigit s) (adjacentFields p)
getFreePositions :: Sodoku -> [Position]
getFreePositions (Sodoku x) = map fieldToPosition $ elemIndices 0 x
isSolved :: Sodoku -> Bool
isSolved s = (length $ getFreePositions s)==0
isDeadEnd :: Sodoku -> Bool
isDeadEnd s = any (\x->x==0) $ map length $ map (getValidDigits s)$ getFreePositions s
setDigit :: Sodoku -> Position -> Int -> Sodoku
setDigit (Sodoku x) pos digit = Sodoku $ h ++ [digit] ++ t
where
field=positionToField pos
h=fst $ splitAt field x
t=tail$ snd $ splitAt field x
getValidDigits :: Sodoku -> Position -> [Int]
getValidDigits s p = [1..9] \\ (getAdjacentDigits s p)
-- Select numbers with few possible choices first to increase execution time
sortImpl :: (Position, [Int]) -> (Position, [Int]) -> Ordering
sortImpl (_, i1) (_, i2)
| length(i1)<length(i2) = LT
| length(i1)>length(i2) = GT
| length(i1)==length(i2) = EQ
selectMoves :: Sodoku -> Maybe (Position, [Int])
selectMoves s
| length(posDigitList)>0 = Just (head posDigitList)
| otherwise = Nothing
where
posDigitList=sortBy sortImpl $ zip freePos validDigits
validDigits=map (getValidDigits s) freePos
freePos=getFreePositions s
createMoves :: Sodoku -> [Sodoku]
createMoves s=
case selectMoves s of
Nothing -> []
(Just (pos, digits)) -> [setDigit s pos d|d<-digits]
solveStep :: Sodoku -> [Sodoku]
solveStep s
| (isSolved s) = [s]
| (isDeadEnd s )==True = []
| otherwise = createMoves s
solve :: Sodoku -> [Sodoku]
solve s
| (isSolved s) = [s]
| (isDeadEnd s)==True = []
| otherwise=concat $ map solve (solveStep s)
s=convertSodoku sodoku2
readSodoku :: String -> Sodoku
readSodoku x = Sodoku []
For a function that maps a function to every nth element in a list:
mapEvery :: Int -> (a -> a) -> [a] -> [a]
mapEvery n f = zipWith ($) (drop 1 . cycle . take n $ f : repeat id)
Is it possible to implement this with foldr like ordinary map?
EDIT: In the title, changed 'folder' to 'foldr'. Autocorrect...
Here's one solution
mapEvery :: Int -> (a -> a) -> [a] -> [a]
mapEvery n f as = foldr go (const []) as 1 where
go a as m
| m == n = f a : as 1
| otherwise = a : as (m+1)
This uses the "foldl as foldr" trick to pass state from the left to the right along the list as you fold. Essentially, if we read the type of foldr as (a -> r -> r) -> r -> [a] -> r then we instantiate r as Int -> [a] where the passed integer is the current number of elements we've passed without calling the function.
Yes, it can:
mapEvery :: Int -> (a -> a) -> [a] -> [a]
mapEvery n f xs
= foldr (\y ys -> g y : ys) []
$ zip [1..] xs
where
g (i, y) = if i `mod` n == 0 then f y else y
And since it's possible to implement zip in terms of foldr, you could get even more fold-y if you really wanted. This even works on infinite lists:
> take 20 $ mapEvery 5 (+1) $ repeat 1
[1,1,1,1,2,1,1,1,1,2,1,1,1,1,2,1,1,1,1,2]
This is what it looks like with even more foldr and inlining g:
mapEvery :: Int -> (a -> a) -> [a] -> [a]
mapEvery _ _ [] = []
mapEvery n f xs
= foldr (\(i, y) ys -> (if i `mod` n == 0 then f y else y) : ys) []
$ foldr step (const []) [1..] xs
where
step _ _ [] = []
step x zipsfn (y:ys) = (x, y) : zipsfn ys
Now, would I recommend writing it this way? Absolutely not. This is about as obfuscated as you can get while still writing "readable" code. But it does demonstrate that this is possible to use the very powerful foldr to implement relatively complex functions.