I'm trying to make a function that will turn [1..10] into [1,1,2,2,3,3,4,4,5,5,6,6,7,7,8,8,9,9,10,10]. What I have so far is prepend which will add a number of the same element to the start of a list:
-- prepend value num times to the start of list (eg: prepend [] 5 1 = [1,1,1,1,1]
prepend :: [a] -> Int -> a -> [a]
prepend [] _ _ = []
prepend list 0 _ = list
prepend list num value = prepend (value : list) (num - 1) value
To create the final list I'm using foldl like this:
foldl (\acc x -> (prepend acc 2 x)) [] [1..10]
I expected it to go through [1..10], and for each element add 2 of x onto acc, but when I put that into GHCI I just get back []
I'm new to Haskell coming from a C/C++ background
If you have an empty list, and you want to prepend some elements, do you really want to return the empty list? No. So remove the following line:
prepend [] _ _ = []
After all, prepend [] 2 0 should be [0,0] and not []. Other than that, it works fine, but you could write it with concatMap and replicate:
concatMap (replicate 2) [1..10]
Related
I try to find the number of elements that are the same in two lists. There are duplicate elements in two lists.
What I want:
-- (because there are two 's' in both lists )
duplicateEle "sssf" "ssah" = 2
-- (because there are two 'a' and one 's' in both lists, intotal 3 common elements)
duplicateEle "aass" "aaas" = 3
-- (because there are two 'a' and two 's' in both lists, intotal 4 common elements)
duplicateEle "ssaa" "ssaa" = 4
My strategy is check each element in List1 to see if it is the element in List2.
if each element of the List1 is the element of the List2.
If true, count 1 and delete (Data.List) the corresponding element in the second list.
For example,
input "dddd" "ssdd" output 2 because there are two d in both lists.
First I check if the 1st element in List1 which is d is an element in List2, the result is True, so I delete only one d in List2, count +1, now count is 1.
Then I check if the 2nd element in List1 which is d is an element in List2, the result is also True, so, I delete one d in List2,count +1, now count is 2.
Because there is not any d left in List2, so, the count will stay at 2.
My code is: (wrong)
import Data.List
duplicateEleCount :: [Char] -> [Char] -> Int
duplicateEleCount (x:xs) ys =
let count = if x `elem` ys then do 1 (delete x ys) else 0
in count + duplicateEleCount xs ys
What you wrote is not so Haskelly. Since it's strings, we can sort them, then group:
import Data.List
-- group :: Eq a => [a] -> [[a]] -- Defined in `Data.List'
dupreps :: String -> String -> Int
dupreps a b = r
where
x = group $ sort a
y = group $ sort b
Now we have them both ordered and grouped, we can just advance along the two lists in an obvious way,
r = merge'n'count x y 0
merge'n'count _ [] cnt = cnt
merge'n'count [] _ cnt = cnt
merge'n'count (g:gs) (f:fs) cnt
| head g == head f
= merge'n'count gs fs (cnt + min (length g) (length f))
| head g < head f
= merge'n'count gs (f:fs) cnt
| head g > head f
= merge'n'count (g:gs) fs cnt
So that we have e.g.
> dupreps "aab" "abbc"
2
> dupreps "aab" "aabbc"
3
> dupreps "aabccc" "bbc"
2
The groups g and f in merge'n'count are always non-empty by construction, so using head is OK.
If you just want to find the number of common elements between two lists which have repeated items, you can simply do this:
f x y = length $ nub $ intersect x y
intersect will find the common elements (with repetition*), and nub will get the distinct values from that list.
Note: intersect will only include repetition from the first argument i.e. intersect "ss" "s" will return "ss" but intersect "s" "ss" will return just "s".
EDIT: Based on the clarification, we can use foldl to get the desired outcome like so:
dup x y = fst $ foldl (\acc z -> if z `elem` (snd acc) then ((1 + fst acc), delete z (snd acc)) else acc) (0,y) x
This applies the strategy outlined in the question - if the element is found in current value of second list, increase the count and modify the second list, else do nothing.
I believe, this is what you intended to write?
import Data.List
duplicateEleCount :: [Char] -> [Char] -> Int
duplicateEleCount (x:xs) ys =
let (count, ys') = if x `elem` ys then (1, delete x ys) else (0, ys)
in count + duplicateEleCount xs ys'
duplicateEleCount [] _ = 0
You can't use do like you were trying to do. Remember that all variables in Haskell are immutable, so delete doesn't change the original list, it returns a new one that we will have to pass along to the recursive call.
A note on performance: this function is O(n*m), since we have to traverse the whole second list for every element in the first list. We can sort the lists first and perform something similar to the merge operation from merge sort to bring it down to O(n*log(n) + m*log(m))).
On another note, because of haskell's laziness, we can split the function up to one like this, without losing any performance and gaining flexibility:
import Data.List
duplicateElems :: [Char] -> [Char] -> [Char]
duplicateElems (x:xs) ys =
if x `elem` ys
then x : duplicateElems xs (delete x ys)
else duplicateElems xs ys
duplicateElems [] _ = []
duplicateEleCount xs ys = length $ duplicateElems xs ys
I'm trying to make it so that on a tuple input (n,m) and a list of tuples xs , if the first item in the tuple in xs is in (n,m) then keep it that way in the new list otherwise add the a tuple consisting of some value k from n to m as a first element and as second element it should be 0.My question is:how can i say "repeat 0" using guards ? Since clearly my code won't run since my code says "repeat = 0"
expand :: (Int,Int) -> Profile ->Profile
expand (n,m) [] = zip [n..m] (repeat 0)
expand (n,m) (x:xs) = zip [n..m] (repeat (|(fst (x) `elem` [n..m]) == False = 0
|otherwise = snd (x))
You can use a helper function here that converts a number in the [ n .. m ] range to a 2-tuple. Here we thus try to find an element in the list xs that matches with the first item of that tuple, if we do not find such element, we use 0:
import Data.List(find)
expand :: (Int,Int) -> Profile -> Profile
expand (n,m) xs = map go [n .. m]
where go i | Just l <- find (\(f, _) -> f == i) xs = l
| otherwise = (i, 0)
For a list, find was implemented as [src]:
find :: (a -> Bool) -> [a] -> Maybe a
find p = listToMaybe . filter p
filter thus will make a list that contains the elements that satisfy the predicate p, and listToMaybe :: [a] -> Maybe a will convert an empty list [] to Nothing, and for a non-empty list (x:_) it will wrap the first element x in a Just data constructor. Due to Haskell's laziness, it will thus look for the first element that satisfies the predicate.
this thus gives us:
Prelude Data.List> expand (2,7) [(4, 2.3), (6, 3)]
[(2,0.0),(3,0.0),(4,2.3),(5,0.0),(6,3.0),(7,0.0)]
given a list of list pairs ::[a,a], I would like to return the possible combinations of lists, where the sublists have been merged on the last of one sublit matching head of the next.
for example
-- combine two lists if they front and back match
merge :: Eq a => [[a]] -> [[a]]
merge (x:y:ys) | last x == head y = merge $ (x ++ (drop 1 y)) : ys
| otherwise = []
merge xs = xs
combinations :: Eq a => [[a]] -> [[a]]
combinations = nub . concatMap merge . permutations
λ= merge [1,2] [2,3]
[1,2,3]
-- there should be no duplicate results
λ= combinations [[1,3],[1,3],[1,3],[1,3],[2,1],[2,1],[2,1],[2,2],[3,2],[3,2],[3,2]]
[[1,3,2,2,1,3,2,1,3,2,1,3],[1,3,2,1,3,2,2,1,3,2,1,3],1,3,2,1,3,2,1,3,2,2,1,3]]
-- the result must be a completely merged list or an empty list
λ= combinations [[1,3], [3,1], [2,2]]
[]
λ= combinations [[1,3], [3, 1]]
[[1,3,1],[3,1,3]]
λ= combinations [[1,3],[3,1],[3,1]]
[[3,1,3,1]]
I can't quite wrap my head around the recursion needed to do this efficiently.
I ended with this solution, but it contains duplicates (you can use Data.List(nub) to get rid of them).
import Data.List(partition)
main :: IO ()
main = do
print $ show tmp
input = [[1,3],[1,3],[1,3],[1,3],[2,1],[2,1],[2,1],[2,2],[3,2],[3,2],[3,2]]
tmp = combinations input
-- this function turns list into list of pair, first element is element of the
-- input list, second element is rest of the list
each :: [a] -> [a] -> [(a, [a])]
each h [] = []
each h (x:xs) = (x, h++xs) : each (x:h) xs
combinations :: (Eq a) => [[a]] -> [[a]]
combinations l = concat $ map combine $ each [] l
where
-- take pair ("prefix list", "unused lists")
combine :: (Eq a) => ([a], [[a]]) -> [[a]]
combine (x, []) = [x]
combine (x, xs) = let
l = last x
-- split unused element to good and bad
(g, b) = partition (\e -> l == head e) xs
s = each [] g
-- add on element to prefix and pass rest (bad + good except used element) to recursion. so it eat one element in each recursive call.
combine' (y, ys) = combine (x ++ tail y, ys ++ b)
-- try to append each good element, concat result
in concat $ map combine' s
I'm not sure if I fully understand what you want to do, so here are just a few notes and hints.
given a list of list pairs ::[a,a]
(...) for example
λ= merge [1,2] [2,3]
Firstly those are not lists of pairs, each element of the list is an integer not a pair. They just happen to be lists with two elements. So you can say they are of type [Int] or an instance of type [a].
the sublists have been merged on the last of one sublit matching head of the next.
This suggests that the size of the lists will grow, and that you will constantly need to inspect their first and last elements. Inspecting the last element of a list implies traversing it each time. You want to avoid that.
This suggests a representation of lists with extra information for easy access. You only need the last element, but I'll put first and last for symmetry.
-- lists together with their last element
data CL a = CL [a] a a
cl :: [a] -> CL a
cl [] = error "CL from empty list"
cl xs = CL xs (head xs) (last xs)
clSafe :: [a] -> Maybe (CL a)
clSafe [] = Nothing
clSafe xs = Just (cl xs)
clFirst (CL _ x _) = x
clLast (CL _ _ x) = x
compatible cs ds = clLast cs == clFirst ds
Perhaps better, maybe you should have
data CL a = CL [a] a a | Nil
And to include an empty list that is compatible with all others.
Another point to take into account is that if e.g., you have a list xs and want to find lists ys to combine as ys++xs, then you want it to be very easy to access all ys with a given last element. That suggests you should store them in a suitable structure. Maybe a hash table.
I'm trying to solve the following problem found in "Introduction to functional programming" First edition Bird-Wadler.
5 .6.2 The function choose k xs returns a list of all subsequences of xs whose
length is exactly k. For example:
? choose 3 "list"
["ist" , "lst" , "lit" , "lis"]
Give a recursive definition of choose. Show that if xs has length n then
choose k xs has length nk
I only could come up with a non-recursive solution based on a function that returns the list of subsets of an array:
subs :: [a] -> [[a]]
subs [] = [[]]
subs (x:xs) = subs xs ++ map (x:) (subs xs)
choose :: Int -> [a] -> [[a]]
choose x = filter ((== x) . length) . subs
I think you are asking:
What is a lone, recursive function solution to this problem?
These problems usually can be solved if you mentally walk through the base and recursive cases carefully. For example:
Choose is a function from ints and list of values to a list of lists of values:
choose :: Int -> [a] -> [[a]]
If the result is supposed to be 0 length then there is exactly one sublist of said length:
choose 0 _ = [ [] ]
If the result is non-zero but we have no more characters with which to make a sublist then there are no solutions:
choose _ [] = []
Otherwise we can take the first character and append that to all solutions of length one shorter:
choose n (x : xs) =
map (x :) (choose (n - 1) xs)
Or we discard this character (ex, drop 'l' and get the result "ist") and look for a solution with the substring:
++ choose n xs
im searching for a solution for my Haskell class.
I have a list of numbers and i need to return SUM for every part of list. Parts are divided by 0. I need to use FOLDL function.
Example:
initial list: [1,2,3,0,3,4,0,5,2,1]
sublist [[1,2,3],[3,4],[5,2,1]]
result [6,7,7]
I have a function for finding 0 in initial list:
findPos list = [index+1 | (index, e) <- zip [0..] list, e == 0]
(returns [4,6] for initial list from example)
and function for making SUM with FOLDL:
sumList list = foldl (+) 0 list
But I completely failed to put it together :/
---- MY SOLUTION
In the end I found something completely different that you guys suggested.
Took me whole day to make it :/
groups :: [Int] -> [Int]
groups list = [sum x | x <- makelist list]
makelist :: [Int] -> [[Int]]
makelist xs = reverse (foldl (\acc x -> zero x acc) [[]] xs)
zero :: Int -> [[Int]] -> [[Int]]
zero x acc | x == 0 = addnewtolist acc
| otherwise = addtolist x acc
addtolist :: Int -> [[Int]] -> [[Int]]
addtolist i listlist = (i : (head listlist)) : (drop 1 listlist)
addnewtolist :: [[Int]] -> [[Int]]
addnewtolist listlist = [] : listlist
I'm going to give you some hints, rather than a complete solution, since this sounds like it may be a homework assignment.
I like the breakdown of steps you've suggested. For the first step (going from a list of numbers with zero markers to a list of lists), I suggest doing an explicit recursion; try this for a template:
splits [] = {- ... -}
splits (0:xs) = {- ... -}
splits (x:xs) = {- ... -}
You can also abuse groupBy if you're careful.
For the second step, it looks like you're almost there; the last step you need is to take a look at the map :: (a -> b) -> ([a] -> [b]) function, which takes a normal function and runs it on each element of a list.
As a bonus exercise, you might want to think about how you might do the whole thing in one shot as a single fold. It's possible -- and even not too difficult, if you track through what the types of the various arguments to foldr/foldl would have to be!
Additions since the question changed:
Since it looks like you've worked out a solution, I now feel comfortable giving some spoilers. =)
I suggested two possible implementations; one that goes step-by-step, as you suggested, and another that goes all at once. The step-by-step one could look like this:
splits [] = []
splits (0:xs) = [] : splits xs
splits (x:xs) = case splits xs of
[] -> [[x]]
(ys:yss) -> ((x:ys):yss)
groups' = map sum . splits
Or like this:
splits' = groupBy (\x y -> y /= 0)
groups'' = map sum . splits'
The all-at-once version might look like this:
accumulate 0 xs = 0:xs
accumulate n (x:xs) = (n+x):xs
groups''' = foldr accumulate [0]
To check that you understand these, here are a few exercises you might like to try:
What do splits and splits' do with [1,2,3,0,4,5]? [1,2,0,3,4,0]? [0]? []? Check your predictions in ghci.
Predict what each of the four versions of groups (including yours) output for inputs like [] or [1,2,0,3,4,0], and then test your prediction in ghci.
Modify groups''' to exhibit the behavior of one of the other implementations.
Modify groups''' to use foldl instead of foldr.
Now that you've completed the problem on your own, I am showing you a slightly less verbose version. Foldr seems better in my opinion to this problem*, but because you asked for foldl I will show you my solution using both functions.
Also, your example appears to be incorrect, the sum of [5,2,1] is 8, not 7.
The foldr version.
makelist' l = foldr (\x (n:ns) -> if x == 0 then 0:(n:ns) else (x + n):ns) [0] l
In this version, we traverse the list, if the current element (x) is a 0, we add a new element to the accumulator list (n:ns). Otherwise, we add the value of the current element to the value of the front element of the accumulator, and replace the front value of the accumulator with this value.
Step by step:
acc = [0], x = 1. Result is [0+1]
acc = [1], x = 2. Result is [1+2]
acc = [3], x = 5. Result is [3+5]
acc = [8], x = 0. Result is 0:[8]
acc = [0,8], x = 4. Result is [0+4,8]
acc = [4,8], x = 3. Result is [4+3,8]
acc = [7,8], x = 0. Result is 0:[7,8]
acc = [0,7,8], x = 3. Result is [0+3,7,8]
acc = [3,7,8], x = 2. Result is [3+2,7,8]
acc = [5,7,8], x = 1. Result is [5+1,7,8] = [6,7,8]
There you have it!
And the foldl version. Works similarly as above, but produces a reversed list, hence the use of reverse at the beginning of this function to unreverse the list.
makelist l = reverse $ foldl (\(n:ns) x -> if x == 0 then 0:(n:ns) else (x + n):ns) [0] l
*Folding the list from the right allows the cons (:) function to be used naturally, using my method with a left fold produces a reversed list. (There is likely a simpler way to do the left fold version that I did not think of that eliminates this triviality.)
As you already solved it, another version:
subListSums list = reverse $ foldl subSum [0] list where
subSum xs 0 = 0 : xs
subSum (x:xs) n = (x+n) : xs
(Assuming that you have only non-negative numbers in the list)