t = True
f = False
anzNachbarn :: [[Bool]] -> (Integer,Integer) -> Integer
anzNachbarn a (x,y)
| x < 0 || y < 0=-1
| otherwise ... here comes the comparison
This is an example matrix:
[[True,False,False],
[True,False,False],
[False,True,False]]
here i need an algorithm, where it calculates (for given x and y position in matrix) its neighbours (only "true" neighboors) and increase it by 1 for each true neighboor.
For example: anzNachbarn [[True,False,False],[True,False,False],[False,True,False]] (0,1)
returns 2 back.
:Edit
I still have a question how can I now implement each component of the result matrix, the number of named elements with True neighboring fields indicates the corresponding component of the argument matrix Applies to
[[True, False, False],
[True, False, False],
[False, True , False]]
the function func returns the results matrix [[1,2,0], [2,3,1], [2,1,1]]
with signature func :: [[Bool]] -> [[Integer]]
have you got any idea about this ?
You almost certainly want to use an array (from Data.Array) in this situation, since looking up an item in a list by its index is very slow.
Here's a quick implementation using Array:
countNeighbors :: Array (Int, Int) Bool -> (Int, Int) -> Int
countNeighbors board (x, y) = length
[ (x', y')
| x' <- [x - 1, x, x + 1]
, y' <- [y - 1, y, y + 1]
, x' /= x || y' /= y
, inRange (bounds board) (x', y')
, board ! (x', y')
]
This is a list comprehension with two generators and three guards. The generators simply give us the indices of the nine positions in a three-by-three square centered at (x, y) (you'll need a minor change if you don't want neighbors at the corners to be considered).
The first guard (x' /= y') ignores (x, y) itself. The second throws out positions that aren't within the bounds of the array. The final guard throws out positions that are in the array but have a False value.
So we now have a list of indices for the neighbors with True values. The length of this list is the desired count.
This is ugly, but seems to work...
anzNachbarn :: [[Bool]] -> (Int,Int) → Integer
anzNachbarn a (x,y)
| x < 0 || y < 0 = -1
| otherwise = sum [v x' y' | x' <- [max 0 (x-1)..x+1],
y' <- [max 0 (y-1)..y+1],
x ≠ x' || y ≠ y' ]
where v i j = if j >= length a
|| i >= length (a !! 0)
|| not (a !! j !! i)
then 0 else 1
[Edit]
In order to convert the whole array, you can write the equally ugly
conv a = [line y | y <- [0 .. (length a) - 1]]
where line y = [anzNachbarn a (x,y) | x <- [0 .. ((length (a !! 0) - 1)]]
Note that the performance of this is terrible.
Related
First of all sorry for my Englisch, I am new in Haskell and i dont really know much about it.
I want all even Numbers from [0..6] and then the square Numbers from them. Like this
a x = [ x * x | x <- [0 .. 6], x `mod` 2 == 0, x > 0]
but with map and filter.
i tried this one, but i dont know where i can put the x*x in there
amap x = map'(\x -> (filter'(\x -> x `mod` 2 == 0 && x > 0)[0..6])) [1,2]
the ouput of this is [[2,4,6]]
You should map the result of the filter, expression like:
map (\x -> x*x) (filter (\x -> x `mod` 2 == 0 && x > 0) [0..6])
filter (\x -> xmod2 == 0 && x > 0) [0..6] will thus return a list of items that are even and greater than 0, then we can use map to map each element of that list x to x*x.
isValid :: Position -> Bool
isValid Position(x _) = x
isValid Position(_ y) = y
| x 'elem' ['a'..'h'] && y 'elem' [1..8] = True
| otherwise = False
I keep getting this error error: Parse error in pattern: x
I am trying to write a function that tells me whether a given poisition is valid or not. Where x is ['a'..'h'] and y is [1..8]
As explained here: Syntax error on 'mod' Haskell
The syntax for using a named function as an infix operator uses backticks (grave accents, U+0060), not apostrophes:
| x `elem` ['a'..'h'] && y `elem` [1..8] = True
------ ------
| otherwise = False
In addition, Position(x _) and Position(_ y) are not valid patterns—you probably intended to use (Position x _) and (Position x y). Note the x, since x is not in scope in the equation you wrote for (Position _ y).
(Position x _) will match all positions, so I suspect you intended:
isValid :: Position -> Bool
isValid (Position x y)
| x `elem` ['a'..'h'] && y `elem` [1..8] = True
| otherwise = False
Or more simply:
isValid :: Position -> Bool
isValid (Position x y) = x `elem` ['a'..'h'] && y `elem` [1..8]
I keep getting this error error: Parse error in pattern: x I am trying to write a function that tells me whether a given position is valid or not. Where x is ['a'..'h'] and y is [1..8].
The other answers already discussed what is wrong: you used a guard in the clause where there is no bounded x:
isValid Position(_ y) = y
and furthermore you use quotes instead of backticks with the elem function:
x 'elem' ['a'..'h']
So a rigorous fix would be:
isValid :: Position -> Bool
isValid (Position x y)
| x `elem` ['a'..'h'] && y `elem` [1..8] = True
| otherwise = False
Since we actually return the result of the guard, we do not need to use guards and can collapse the guards into one expression:
isValid :: Position -> Bool
isValid (Position x y) = x `elem` ['a'..'h'] && y `elem` [1..8]
Nevertheless since we here work with ranges and the second range are integers, we do not have to use elem on a range, we can use:
isValid :: Position -> Bool
isValid (Position x y) = 'a' <= x && x <= 'h' && 1 <= y && y <= 8
For such small ranges, there will probably not be that much impact on performance, but elem works in O(n) worst case, whereas the two bounds checks work in O(1).
In
| x 'elem' ['a'..'h'] && y 'elem' [1..8] = True
x is unbound. It doesn't appear at all in
isValid Position(_ y) = y
in particular. Also, you probably meant to use `elem`, and not 'elem'.
I am trying to write a function that tells me whether a given poisition is valid or not. Where x is ['a'..'h'] and y is [1..8]
You didn't write the definition of Position, but it seems like this would be something like
data Position = Position Int Int
isValid :: Position -> Bool
isValid (Position x y) = x `elem` ['a'..'h'] && y `elem` [1..8]
(which builds for me).
i recently picked up Haskell and i am having trouble putting in code the way to look if an element is in the rest of the list (x:lx) in this case in lx.
My code:
atmostonce:: [Int] -> Int -> Bool
atmostonce [] y = True
atmostonce (x:lx) y
| (x==y) && (`lx` == y) = False
| otherwise = True
The way it is now checks for the first element (x==y) but i don't know how to check if the element y exists in lx. The thing i am actually trying to accomplish is to find out if in the list of Intigers lx the number y contains 0 or 1 times and return True otherwise return False
There are several implementations you could use for this, one that I see which avoids applying length to a potentially infinite list is
atmostonce xs y
= (<= 1)
$ length
$ take 2
$ filter (== y) xs
This removes all elements from xs that are not equal to y, then takes at most 2 of those (take 2 [1] == [1], take 2 [] == []), calculates the length (it's safe to use here because we know take 2 won't return an infinite list), then checks if that is no more than 1. Alternatively you could solve this using direct recursion, but it would be best to use the worker pattern:
atmostonce = go 0
where
go 2 _ _ = False
go n [] _ = n <= 1
go n (x:xs) y =
if x == y
then go (n + 1) xs y
else go n xs y
The n <= 1 clause could be replaced by True, but ideally it'll short-circuit once n == 2, and n shouldn't ever be anything other than 0, 1, or 2. However, for your implementation I believe you are looking for the elem function:
elem :: Eq a => a -> [a] -> Bool
atmostonce [] y = True
atmostonce (x:ls) y
| (x == y) && (y `elem` ls) = False
| otherwise = True
But this won't return you the value you want, since atmostonce [1, 2, 2, 2] 2 would return True. Instead, you'd need to do recursion down the rest of the list if x /= y:
atmostonce (x:ls) y
| (x == y) && (y `elem` ls) = False
| otherwise = atmostonce ls y
You can do this using the elem function:
atmostonce:: [Int] -> Int -> Bool
atmostonce [] y = True
atmostonce (x:lx) y | x /= y = atmostonce lx y
| otherwise = not $ elem y lx
You better first check if the element x is not equal to y. If that is the case, you simply call the recursive part atmostonce lx y: you thus search further in the list.
In case x == y, (the otherwise case), you need to check if there is another element in lx (the remainder of the list), that is equal to x. If that is the case, you need to return False, because in that case there are multiple instances in the list. Otherwise you return True.
Furthermore you can generalize your function further:
atmostonce:: (Eq a) => [a] -> a -> Bool
atmostonce [] y = True
atmostonce (x:lx) y | x /= y = atmostonce lx y
| otherwise = not $ elem y lx
Eq is a typeclass, it means that there are functions == and /= defined on a. So you can call them, regardless of the real type of a (Int, String, whatever).
Finally in the first case, you can use an underscore (_) which means you don't care about the value (although in this case it doesn't matter). You can perhaps change the order of the cases, since they are disjunct, and this makes the function syntactically total:
atmostonce:: (Eq a) => [a] -> a -> Bool
atmostonce (x:lx) y | x /= y = atmostonce lx y
| otherwise = not $ elem y lx
atmostonce _ _ = True
The existing answers are good, but you can use dropWhile to do the part that's currently done via manual recursion:
atMostOnce xs y =
let afterFirstY = drop 1 $ dropWhile (/= y) xs
in y `notElem` afterFirstY
I am doing problem 112 on Project Euler and came up with the following to test the example case (I'll change the number in answer to 0.99 to get the real answer):
isIncre x | x == 99 = False
| otherwise = isIncre' x
where
isIncre' x = ???
isDecre x = isIncre (read $ reverse $ show x :: Int)
isBouncy x = (isIncre x == False) && (isDecre x == False)
bouncers x = length [n|n<-[1..x],isBouncy n]
nonBouncers x = length [n|n<-[1..x],(isBouncy n) == False]
answer = head [x|x<-[1..],((bouncers x) / (nonBouncers x)) == 0.5]
But what I don't know how to do is define a function isIncre' which tests to see if the digits in a number are greater than or equal to the one on their left. I know it needs to be done recursively but how?
On a side note, I know I can only use / on two floating point numbers but how can I make the output of bouncers to be floating point number instead of an integer?
Edit:
Thanks for the help, but it didn't like the = when I changed isIncre to:
isIncre x | x <= 99 = False
| otherwise = isIncre' (mshow x)
where
isIncre' (x:y:xs) = (x <= y) && (isIncre' (y:xs))
isIncre' _ = True
The number 0.99 cannot be represented exactly in base 2. Hence you may want to avoid the use of floating point numbers for this assignment. Instead, to see whether exactly 99% of the numbers <= x are bouncers, test whether
100 * (x - bouncers x) == x
This works because it is (mathematically) the same as (x - bouncers x) == x / 100, which is true if (x - bouncers x) (the number of non-bouncy numbers) is 1% of x. Observe that there is thus no need to define nonBouncers.
Also, another way to define bouncers is
bouncers x = length $ filter isBouncy [1..x]
However, you should reconsider your design. Currently you are recalculating the number of bouncy numbers up to x, for every x that you try. So a lot of work is being done over and over. What you may instead want to do, is generate a sequence of tuples (x, n), where n is the number of bouncy numbers <= x. Observe that if there are n bouncy numbers <= x, then there are either n or n + 1 bouncy number <= x + 1.
More specifically, to calculate (x + 1, n'), all you need is (x, n) and the output of isbouncy (x + 1).
If you have a string representation of an integer number, you could write the isIncre function like this (ord converts a character to an integer and string is just a list of chars):
isIncre (x:y:xs) = ord x <= ord y && isIncre (y:xs)
isIncre _ = True
It could be even nicer to write the isIncre function without ord, working on any ordered type, then combine it with "map ord" when you call it instead. The implementation would then be just:
isIncre (x:y:xs) = x <= y && isIncre (y:xs)
isIncre _ = True
That could be called like this, if x is an integer number
isIncre (map ord (show x))
I would use really nice functional version of isIncre if you have string representation of intetger.
isIncre :: (Ord a) => [a] -> Bool
isIncre list = and $ zipWith (<=) list (tail list)
If not, just compose it with show.
isIncreNum :: Integer -> Bool
isIncreNum = isIncre . show
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]