I'm trying to write 'fizzbuzz' in haskell using list comprehensions.
Why doesn't the following work, and how should it be?
[ if x `mod` 5 == 0 then "BUZZFIZZ"
if x `mod` 3 == 0 then "BUZZ"
if x `mod` 4 == 0 then "FIZZ" | x <- [1..20],
x `mod` 3 == 0,
x `mod` 4 == 0,
x `mod` 5 == 0 ]
This isn't valid Haskell. The else branch is not optional in if ... then ... else. Rather than using if, this seems like a good opportunity to use a case statement.
case (x `rem` 3, x `rem` 5) of
(0,0) -> "fizzbuzz"
(0,_) -> "fizz"
(_,0) -> "buzz"
_ -> show x
This snippet will work for a traditional "fizzbuzz"; your code seems to be slightly different.
First of all, you're missing the else parts of your if expressions. In Haskell, if is an expression, not a statement, so the else part is mandatory.
Secondly, the list comprehension only produces any values if all the guard expressions evaluate to True. There is no number between 1 and 20 that is 0 modulo 3, 4, and 5, so you'll get no results. You'll want to use || (logical OR) to combine them instead.
Third, most definitions of FizzBuzz want you to return the number itself if it does not meet any of the other conditions. In that case, you'll want to use show to convert the number to a String.
Here's another version that can be extended to an arbitrary number of substitutions:
fizzbuzz' :: [(Integer, String)] -> Integer -> String
fizzbuzz' ss n = foldl (\str (num, subst) -> if n `mod` num == 0 then str ++ subst else str ++ "") "" ss
fizzbuzz :: [(Integer, String)] -> Integer -> String
fizzbuzz ss n = if null str then show n else str
where str = fizzbuzz' ss n
You could inline fizzbuzz' in the where clause of fizzbuzz, but I found a separate function easier for testing.
You can run it like this:
λ> mapM_ putStrLn $ map (fizzbuzz [(3, "fizz"), (5, "buzz")]) [9..15]
fizz
buzz
11
fizz
13
14
fizzbuzz
Or with extra substitutions:
λ> mapM_ putStrLn $ map (fizzbuzz [(3, "fizz"), (5, "buzz"), (7, "dazz")]) [19..24]
19
buzz
fizzdazz
22
23
fizz
In general, it helps if you give the error as well, not just the code.
But in this case, the problem is that every if needs an else clause. Keep in mind that an if statement is just an expression, so both branches must return a value of an appropriate type.
You've got several bugs in the code, by the way, but that's the only compiler error.
Here is a response to the traditional FizzBuzz problem using list comprehension + guards.
fizzbuzz = [fb x| x <- [1..100]]
where fb y
| y `mod` 15 == 0 = "FizzBuzz"
| y `mod` 3 == 0 = "Fizz"
| y `mod` 5 == 0 = "Buzz"
| otherwise = show y
Or alternatively don't be afraid to move where clause into separate succinct function for evaluating x then call that function from your list comprehension. Its better to build on small concise functions than trying to solve it in one more complex function. e.g.
fizzval x
| x `mod` 15 == 0 = "FizzBuzz"
| x `mod` 3 == 0 = "Fizz"
| x `mod` 5 == 0 = "Buzz"
| otherwise = show x
fizzbuzz = [fizzval x| x <- [1..100]]
With the help of some judicious currying, Calvin Bottoms did it in 77 characters.
http://freshbrewedcode.com/calvinbottoms/2012/02/25/fizzbuzz-in-haskell/
[max(show x)(concat[n|(f,n)<-[(3,"Fizz"),(5,"Buzz")],mod x f==0])|x<-[1..25]]
The Monad Reader contains a solution as well as many valuable insights and some more fun exercises. The solution is copied here for those who just want to see it.
fizzbuzz :: Int -> String
fizzbuzz n = (test 3 "fizz" . test 5 "buzz") id (show n)
where test d s x | n `mod` d == 0 = const (s ++ x "")
| otherwise = x
There is no x that fullfills the condition to be divisible by 3, 4 and 5 in the range 1..20.
Therefore, you would get an empty list if the example were syntactically correct, which it is not.
Related
I'm trying to work out the last digit of a very large number. The challenge is that I'm getting the error
*** Exception: Prelude.!!: negative index
which I don't think should be possible. This happens when I try:
lastDigit [27,15,14]
Here is my code, which is based on https://brilliant.org/wiki/finding-the-last-digit-of-a-power/:
In this case, n becomes 7 and modList 7 gives the recurring sequence [1,7,9,3,1,7,9,3...], which is the first argument of (!!) in the relevant guard. The second argument of (!!) gives 1 because (y:ys) is (15,14) and rem (powers (15 ^ 14)) 4 is 1. Please help.
lastDigit :: [Integer] -> Integer
lastDigit [] = 1
lastDigit [x] = x `mod` 10
lastDigit [x,y] = x ^ y `mod` 10
lastDigit (x:y:ys)
| y == 0 && head ys /= 0 = 1
| n == 0 = 0
| n == 9 || n == 4 = (!!) (modList n) (rem (fromIntegral $ powers (y:ys)) 2)
| n == 2 || n == 3 || n == 7 || n == 8 = (!!) (modList n) (rem (fromIntegral $ powers (y:ys)) 4)
| otherwise = n
where n = mod x 10
powers xs = foldr1 (^) xs
modList n = drop 3 . take 30 $ cycle [mod x 10| x <- map (n^) $ take 4 [1..]]
You should be very specific about the types, otherwise they might get implicit converted during calculations. If you add Int type to your algorithm, ghc will not complain and run into an negative index exception
(fromIntegral $ powers (y:ys)) 2 :: Int)
but if you provide
(fromIntegral $ powers (y:ys)) 2 :: Integer)
it will result in
• Couldn't match expected type ‘Int’ with actual type ‘Integer’
• In the second argument of ‘(!!)’, namely
‘(rem (fromIntegral $ powers (y : ys)) 2 :: Integer)’
As you can see you have an implicit Int conversion there. Try to split up your function into smaller ones and provide a type signature, then you should be able to successfully align the types and calculate with Integers instead of Int.
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'm still learning Haskell, and I was wondering if there is a less verbose way to express the below statement using 1 line of code:
map (\x -> (x, (if mod x 3 == 0 then "fizz" else "") ++
if mod x 5 == 0 then "buzz" else "")) [1..100]
Produces:
[(1,""),(2,""),(3,"fizz"),(4,""),(5,"buzz"),(6,"fizz"),(7,""),(8,""),(9,"fizz"),(10,"buzz"),(11,""),(12,"fizz"),(13,""),(14,""),(15,"fizzbuzz"),(16,""),(17,""),(18,"fizz"),(19,""),(20,"buzz"),(21,"fizz"),(22,""),(23,""),(24,"fizz"),(25,"buzz"),(26,""),(27,"fizz"),(28,""),(29,""),(30,"fizzbuzz"), etc
It just feels like I'm fighting the syntax more than I should. I've seen other questions for this in Haskell, but I'm looking for the most optimal way to express this in a single statement (trying to understand how to work the syntax better).
We need no stinkin' mod...
zip [1..100] $ zipWith (++) (cycle ["","","fizz"]) (cycle ["","","","","buzz"])
or slightly shorter
import Data.Function(on)
zip [1..100] $ (zipWith (++) `on` cycle) ["","","fizz"] ["","","","","buzz"]
Or the brute force way:
zip [1..100] $ cycle ["","","fizz","","buzz","fizz","","","fizz","buzz","","fizz","","","fizzbuzz"]
If you insist on a one-liner:
[(x, concat $ ["fizz" | mod x 3 == 0] ++ ["buzz" | mod x 5 == 0]) | x <- [1..100]]
How's about...
fizzBuzz = [(x, fizz x ++ buzz x) | x <- [1..100]]
where fizz n | n `mod` 3 == 0 = "fizz"
| otherwise = ""
buzz n | n `mod` 5 == 0 = "buzz"
| otherwise = ""
Couldn't resist going in the other direction and making it more complicated. Look, no mod...
merge as#(a#(ia,sa):as') bs#(b#(ib,sb):bs') =
case compare ia ib of
LT -> a : merge as' bs
GT -> b : merge as bs'
EQ -> (ia, sa++sb) : merge as' bs'
merge as bs = as ++ bs
zz (n,s) = [(i, s) | i <- [n,2*n..]]
fizzBuzz = foldr merge [] $ map zz [(1,""), (3,"fizz"), (5,"buzz")]
Along the same lines as larsmans' answer:
fizzBuzz = [(x, f 3 "fizz" x ++ f 5 "buzz" x) | x <- [1..100]]
where f k s n | n `mod` k == 0 = s
| otherwise = ""
I think the reason why you feel like you are fighting the syntax is because you are mixing too many types.
Instead of trying to print:
[(1, ""), (2,""), (3,"Fizz")...]
Just think of printing strings:
["1","2","Fizz"...]
My attempt:
Prelude> let fizzBuzz x | x `mod` 15 == 0 = "FizzBuzz" | x `mod` 5 == 0 = "Buzz" | x `mod` 3 == 0 = "Fizz" | otherwise = show x
Prelude> [fizzBuzz x | x <-[1..100]]
["1","2","Fizz","4","Buzz","Fizz","7","8","Fizz","Buzz","11","Fizz","13","14","FizzBuzz"...]
In order to convert an Int to String you use the:
show x
Just for studying
zipWith (\a b -> b a) (map show [1..100]) $ cycle [id,id,const "fizz",id,const "buzz",const "fizz",id,id,const "fizz",const "buzz",id,const "fizz",id,id,const "fizzbuzz"]
produces
["1","2","fizz","4","buzz","fizz","7","8","fizz","buzz","11","fizz","13","14","fizzbuzz","16","17","fizz","19","buzz","fizz","22","23","fizz","buzz","26","fizz","28","29","fizzbuzz","31","32","fizz","34","buzz","fizz","37","38","fizz","buzz","41","fizz","43","44","fizzbuzz","46","47","fizz","49","buzz","fizz","52","53","fizz","buzz","56","fizz","58","59","fizzbuzz","61","62","fizz","64","buzz","fizz","67","68","fizz","buzz","71","fizz","73","74","fizzbuzz","76","77","fizz","79","buzz","fizz","82","83","fizz","buzz","86","fizz","88","89","fizzbuzz","91","92","fizz","94","buzz","fizz","97","98","fizz","buzz"]
Writer monad may look nice (if you don't like concat):
fizzBuzz = [(x, execWriter $ when (x `mod` 3 == 0) (tell "fizz") >> when (x `mod` 5 == 0) (tell "buzz")) | x <- [1..100]]
It's not particularly succinct though.
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.
I am doing yet another projecteuler question in Haskell, where I must find if the sum of the factorials of each digit in a number is equal to the original number. If not repeat the process until the original number is reached. The next part is to find the number of starting numbers below 1 million that have 60 non-repeating units. I got this far:
prob74 = length [ x | x <- [1..999999], 60 == ((length $ chain74 x)-1)]
factorial n = product [1..n]
factC x = sum $ map factorial (decToList x)
chain74 x | x == 0 = []
| x == 1 = [1]
| x /= factC x = x : chain74 (factC x)
But what I don't know how to do is to get it to stop once the value for x has become cyclic. How would I go about stopping chain74 when it gets back to the original number?
When you walk through the list that might contain a cycle your function needs to keep track of the already seen elements to be able to check for repetitions. Every new element is compared against the already seen elements. If the new element has already been seen, the cycle is complete, if it hasn't been seen the next element is inspected.
So this calculates the length of the non-cyclic part of a list:
uniqlength :: (Eq a) => [a] -> Int
uniqlength l = uniqlength_ l []
where uniqlength_ [] ls = length ls
uniqlength_ (x:xs) ls
| x `elem` ls = length ls
| otherwise = uniqlength_ xs (x:ls)
(Performance might be better when using a set instead of a list, but I haven't tried that.)
What about passing another argument (y for example) to the chain74 in the list comprehension.
Morning fail so EDIT:
[.. ((length $ chain74 x x False)-1)]
chain74 x y not_first | x == y && not_first = replace_with_stop_value_:-)
| x == 0 = []
| x == 1 = [1]
| x == 2 = [2]
| x /= factC x = x : chain74 (factC x) y True
I implemented a cycle-detection algorithm in Haskell on my blog. It should work for you, but there might be a more clever approach for this particular problem:
http://coder.bsimmons.name/blog/2009/04/cycle-detection/
Just change the return type from String to Bool.
EDIT: Here is a modified version of the algorithm I posted about:
cycling :: (Show a, Eq a) => Int -> [a] -> Bool
cycling k [] = False --not cycling
cycling k (a:as) = find 0 a 1 2 as
where find _ _ c _ [] = False
find i x c p (x':xs)
| c > k = False -- no cycles after k elements
| x == x' = True -- found a cycle
| c == p = find c x' (c+1) (p*2) xs
| otherwise = find i x (c+1) p xs
You can remove the 'k' if you know your list will either cycle or terminate soon.
EDIT2: You could change the following function to look something like:
prob74 = length [ x | x <- [1..999999], let chain = chain74 x, not$ cycling 999 chain, 60 == ((length chain)-1)]
Quite a fun problem. I've come up with a corecursive function that returns the list of the "factorial chains" for every number, stopping as soon as they would repeat themselves:
chains = [] : let f x = x : takeWhile (x /=) (chains !! factC x) in (map f [1..])
Giving:
take 4 chains == [[],[1],[2],[3,6,720,5043,151,122,5,120,4,24,26,722,5044,169,363601,1454]]
map head $ filter ((== 60) . length) (take 10000 chains)
is
[1479,1497,1749,1794,1947,1974,4079,4097,4179,4197,4709,4719,4790,4791,4907,4917
,4970,4971,7049,7094,7149,7194,7409,7419,7490,7491,7904,7914,7940,7941,9047,9074
,9147,9174,9407,9417,9470,9471,9704,9714,9740,9741]
It works by calculating the "factC" of its position in the list, then references that position in itself. This would generate an infinite list of infinite lists (using lazy evaluation), but using takeWhile the inner lists only continue until the element occurs again or the list ends (meaning a deeper element in the corecursion has repeated itself).
If you just want to remove cycles from a list you can use:
decycle :: Eq a => [a] -> [a]
decycle = dc []
where
dc _ [] = []
dc xh (x : xs) = if elem x xh then [] else x : dc (x : xh) xs
decycle [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 3, 2] == [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]