Lets say I wanted to write a recursive anonymous function to calculate factorial values.
print(((int a) => a == 1? 1 : a * this(a - 1))(4));
I would expect this to print 24, which is 4! (this function is obviously prone to issues with negative numbers, but that's beside the point)
The problem is that this doesn't refer to the anonymous function in order to make a recursive call.
Is this something that's possible in dart? I've seen it in python before, where a function is assigned to a variable with the walrus operator ( := ) and is also recursive.
Here is an example that creates a list of the average value on each level of a binary tree:
return (get_levels := lambda l: ([mean(node.val for node in l)] + get_levels([child for node in l for child in [node.left, node.right] if child])) if l else [])([root])
As you can see, the lambda is called get_levels. It calculates the average of the current level, then makes a recursive call on the next level of the binary tree and appends it to the list of previous level averages.
The closest that I could come up with is this:
var getLevels;
List<double> averageOfLevels(TreeNode? root) {
return root == null ? [] : (getLevels = (List<TreeNode> level) => level.isNotEmpty ? <double>[level.map((node) => node.val).fold(0, (int l, int r) => l+r) / level.length] + getLevels([for(var node in level) ...[node.left, node.right]].whereType<TreeNode>().toList()) : <double>[])([root]);
}
But, as you can see, this required an additional line where the variable is defined ahead of time.
Is it possible to achieve something more similar to the python example using callable classes?
There's a classic Lisp/Scheme problem of how to create a recursive lambda. The same technique of creating one anonymous function that takes itself as an argument and then using another anonymous function to pass the first anonymous function to itself can be applied to Dart (albeit by sacrificing some type-safety; I can't think of a way to strongly type a Function that takes its own type as an argument). For example, a recursive factorial implementation:
void main() {
var factorial = (Function f, int x) {
return f(f, x);
}((Function self, int x) {
return (x <= 1) ? 1 : x * self(self, x - 1);
}, 4);
print('4! = $factorial'); // Prints: 4! = 24
}
All that said, this seems like a pretty contrived, academic problem. In practice, just create a named function. It can be a local function if you want to avoid polluting a global namespace. It would be far more readable and maintainable.
Is it possible to achieve something more similar to the python example using callable classes?
I'm not sure where you're going with that since Dart neither allows defining anonymous classes nor local classes, so even if you made a callable class, it would violate your request for being anonymous.
Related
I'd like the example computation expression and values below to return 6. For some the numbers aren't yielding like I'd expect. What's the step I'm missing to get my result? Thanks!
type AddBuilder() =
let mutable x = 0
member _.Yield i = x <- x + i
member _.Zero() = 0
member _.Return() = x
let add = AddBuilder()
(* Compiler tells me that each of the numbers in add don't do anything
and suggests putting '|> ignore' in front of each *)
let result = add { 1; 2; 3 }
(* Currently the result is 0 *)
printfn "%i should be 6" result
Note: This is just for creating my own computation expression to expand my learning. Seq.sum would be a better approach. I'm open to the idea that this example completely misses the value of computation expressions and is no good for learning.
There is a lot wrong here.
First, let's start with mere mechanics.
In order for the Yield method to be called, the code inside the curly braces must use the yield keyword:
let result = add { yield 1; yield 2; yield 3 }
But now the compiler will complain that you also need a Combine method. See, the semantics of yield is that each of them produces a finished computation, a resulting value. And therefore, if you want to have more than one, you need some way to "glue" them together. This is what the Combine method does.
Since your computation builder doesn't actually produce any results, but instead mutates its internal variable, the ultimate result of the computation should be the value of that internal variable. So that's what Combine needs to return:
member _.Combine(a, b) = x
But now the compiler complains again: you need a Delay method. Delay is not strictly necessary, but it's required in order to mitigate performance pitfalls. When the computation consists of many "parts" (like in the case of multiple yields), it's often the case that some of them should be discarded. In these situation, it would be inefficient to evaluate all of them and then discard some. So the compiler inserts a call to Delay: it receives a function, which, when called, would evaluate a "part" of the computation, and Delay has the opportunity to put this function in some sort of deferred container, so that later Combine can decide which of those containers to discard and which to evaluate.
In your case, however, since the result of the computation doesn't matter (remember: you're not returning any results, you're just mutating the internal variable), Delay can just execute the function it receives to have it produce the side effects (which are - mutating the variable):
member _.Delay(f) = f ()
And now the computation finally compiles, and behold: its result is 6. This result comes from whatever Combine is returning. Try modifying it like this:
member _.Combine(a, b) = "foo"
Now suddenly the result of your computation becomes "foo".
And now, let's move on to semantics.
The above modifications will let your program compile and even produce expected result. However, I think you misunderstood the whole idea of the computation expressions in the first place.
The builder isn't supposed to have any internal state. Instead, its methods are supposed to manipulate complex values of some sort, some methods creating new values, some modifying existing ones. For example, the seq builder1 manipulates sequences. That's the type of values it handles. Different methods create new sequences (Yield) or transform them in some way (e.g. Combine), and the ultimate result is also a sequence.
In your case, it looks like the values that your builder needs to manipulate are numbers. And the ultimate result would also be a number.
So let's look at the methods' semantics.
The Yield method is supposed to create one of those values that you're manipulating. Since your values are numbers, that's what Yield should return:
member _.Yield x = x
The Combine method, as explained above, is supposed to combine two of such values that got created by different parts of the expression. In your case, since you want the ultimate result to be a sum, that's what Combine should do:
member _.Combine(a, b) = a + b
Finally, the Delay method should just execute the provided function. In your case, since your values are numbers, it doesn't make sense to discard any of them:
member _.Delay(f) = f()
And that's it! With these three methods, you can add numbers:
type AddBuilder() =
member _.Yield x = x
member _.Combine(a, b) = a + b
member _.Delay(f) = f ()
let add = AddBuilder()
let result = add { yield 1; yield 2; yield 3 }
I think numbers are not a very good example for learning about computation expressions, because numbers lack the inner structure that computation expressions are supposed to handle. Try instead creating a maybe builder to manipulate Option<'a> values.
Added bonus - there are already implementations you can find online and use for reference.
1 seq is not actually a computation expression. It predates computation expressions and is treated in a special way by the compiler. But good enough for examples and comparisons.
Is there an idiomatic way to apply a function to all items in a list ?
For example, in Python, say we wish to capitalize all strings in a list, we can use a loop :
regimentNames = ['Night Riflemen', 'Jungle Scouts', 'The Dragoons', 'Midnight Revengence', 'Wily Warriors']
# create a variable for the for loop results
regimentNamesCapitalized_f = []
# for every item in regimentNames
for i in regimentNames:
# capitalize the item and add it to regimentNamesCapitalized_f
regimentNamesCapitalized_f.append(i.upper())
But a more concise way is:
capitalizer = lambda x: x.upper()
regimentNamesCapitalized_m = list(map(capitalizer, regimentNames)); regimentNamesCapitalized_m
What is an equivalent way to call a function on all items in a list in Dart ?
If you want to apply a function to all items in a List (or Iterable) and collect the results, Dart provides an Iterable.map function that is equivalent to Python's map:
// Dart
regimentNamesCapitalized_m = regimentNames.map((x) => x.toUpperCase()).toList();
Python also provides list comprehensions, which usually are considered more Pythonic and often are preferred to the functional approach:
# Python
regimentNamesCapitalized_m = [x.upper() for x in regimentNames]
Dart's equivalent of Python's list comprehensions is collection-for:
// Dart
regimentNamesCapitalized_m = [for (var x in regimentNames) x.toUpperCase()];
If you're calling a function for its side-effect and don't care about its return value, you could use Iterable.forEach instead of Iterable.map. In such cases, however, I personally prefer explicit loops:
I think they're more readable by virtue of being more common.
They're more flexible. You can use break or continue to control iteration.
They might be more efficient. .forEach involves an extra function call per iteration to invoke the supplied callback.
The answer seems to be to use anonymous functions, or pass a function to a lists forEach method.
Passing a function:
void capitalise(var string) {
var foo = string.toUpperCase();
print(foo);
}
var list = ['apples', 'bananas', 'oranges'];
list.forEach(capitalise);
Using an anonymous function:
list.forEach((item){
print(item.toUpperCase());
});
If the function is going to be used only in one place, I think its better to use the anonymous function, as it is easy to read what is happening in the list.
If the function is going to be used in multiple places, then its better to pass the function instead of using an anonymous function.
A friend asked me to design a function that does the following : f1()()()()(0)
should give the output as 4. f1()(0) should give output as 1. It is the number of preceding parentheses before 0 is passed. I searched thoroughly on how it should be done. Got some concepts to string together: like IIFE, Anonymous Functions and Lexical Scope. Does this use a more advanced javascript concept function that should be known?
Here is the image of what needs to be done
No advanced concepts. You only need to know how to return a function from another function.
I would prefer to call the function f0 because f0(0) obviously should return 0. Then we can imagine all such kinds of functions that return their level of parenthetication—for example, f42(0) returns 42.
When called without a parameter, f0() should return f1, so that f0()(0) is 1, and so on. That is an easy thing to do:
function f0(x) {
return (x === 0) ? 0 : f1(x);
}
Obviously, we do not want to write down an infinity of functions like this. Let's make a function factory that will build them automatically as needed:
function factory(level) {
function f_level(x) {
return (x === 0) ? level : factory(level + 1);
}
return f_level;
}
The factory always returns a function, and factory(0) is exactly the function f0 you wanted.
When I have 2 functions in D like this:
void func() {
void innerFunc() {
import std.stdio;
writeln(x);
}
int x = 5;
innerFunc();
}
When I call func this will print 5. How does it work? Where in memory does the 5 get stored? How does innerFunc know it has to print 5?
I attempt to answer this in broad terms. This type of issue arises in a number of languages that permit nested function definitions (including Ada and Pascal).
Normally, a variable like "x" is allocated on the processor stack. That's the normal process in any language that permits recursion.
When a nested function is called, a descriptor for the enclosing function's stack frame gets passed as hidden argument.
funct() then knows that x is located at some offset specified by the base pointer register.
innerFunct () knows the offset of x but has to derive the base from the hidden argument. It can't use its own base pointer value because it will be different from funct(). And, if innerFunct () called itself, the base pointer value would be different in each invocation.
I'm writing a LSL to Lua translator, and I'm having all sorts of trouble implementing incrementing and decrementing operators. LSL has such things using the usual C like syntax (x++, x--, ++x, --x), but Lua does not. Just to avoid massive amounts of typing, I refer to these sorts of operators as "crements". In the below code, I'll use "..." to represent other parts of the expression.
... x += 1 ...
Wont work, coz Lua only has simple assignment.
... x = x + 1 ...
Wont work coz that's a statement, and Lua can't use statements in expressions. LSL can use crements in expressions.
function preIncrement(x) x = x + 1; return x; end
... preIncrement(x) ...
While it does provide the correct value in the expression, Lua is pass by value for numbers, so the original variable is not changed. If I could get this to actually change the variable, then all is good. Messing with the environment might not be such a good idea, dunno what scope x is. I think I'll investigate that next. The translator could output scope details.
Assuming the above function exists -
... x = preIncrement(x) ...
Wont work for the "it's a statement" reason.
Other solutions start to get really messy.
x = preIncrement(x)
... x ...
Works fine, except when the original LSL code is something like this -
while (doOneThing(x++))
{
doOtherThing(x);
}
Which becomes a whole can of worms. Using tables in the function -
function preIncrement(x) x[1] = x[1] + 1; return x[1]; end
temp = {x}
... preincrement(temp) ...
x = temp[1]
Is even messier, and has the same problems.
Starting to look like I might have to actually analyse the surrounding code instead of just doing simple translations to sort out what the correct way to implement any given crement will be. Anybody got any simple ideas?
I think to really do this properly you're going to have to do some more detailed analysis, and splitting of some expressions into multiple statements, although many can probably be translated pretty straight-forwardly.
Note that at least in C, you can delay post-increments/decrements to the next "sequence point", and put pre-increments/decrements before the previous sequence point; sequence points are only located in a few places: between statements, at "short-circuit operators" (&& and ||), etc. (more info here)
So it's fine to replace x = *y++ + z * f (); with { x = *y + z * f(); y = y + 1; }—the user isn't allowed to assume that y will be incremented before anything else in the statement, only that the value used in *y will be y before it's incremented. Similarly, x = *--y + z * f(); can be replaced with { y = y - 1; x = *y + z * f (); }
Lua is designed to be pretty much impervious to implementations of this sort of thing. It may be done as kind of a compiler/interpreter issue, since the interpreter can know that variables only change when a statement is executed.
There's no way to implement this kind of thing in Lua. Not in the general case. You could do it for global variables by passing a string to the increment function. But obviously it wouldn't work for locals, or for variables that are in a table that is itself global.
Lua doesn't want you to do it; it's best to find a way to work within the restriction. And that means code analysis.
Your proposed solution only will work when your Lua variables are all global. Unless this is something LSL also does, you will get trouble translating LSL programs that use variables called the same way in different places.
Lua is only able of modifying one lvalue per statement - tables being passed to functions are the only exception to this rule. You could use a local table to store all locals, and that would help you out with the pre-...-crements; they can be evaluated before the expression they are contained in is evauated. But the post-...-crements have to be evaluated later on, which is simply not possible in lua - at least not without some ugly code involving anonymous functions.
So you have one options: you must accept that some LSL statements will get translated to several Lua statements.
Say you have a LSL statement with increments like this:
f(integer x) {
integer y = x + x++;
return (y + ++y)
}
You can translate this to a Lua statement like this:
function f(x) {
local post_incremented_x = x + 1 -- extra statement 1 for post increment
local y = x + post_incremented_x
x = post_incremented_x -- extra statement 2 for post increment
local pre_incremented_y = y + 1
return y + pre_incremented_y
y = pre_incremented_y -- this line will never be executed
}
So you basically will have to add two statements per ..-crement used in your statements. For complex structures, that will mean calculating the order in which the expressions are evaluated.
For what is worth, I like with having post decrements and predecrements as individual statements in languages. But I consider it a flaw of the language when they can also be used as expressions. The syntactic sugar quickly becomes semantic diabetes.
After some research and thinking I've come up with an idea that might work.
For globals -
function preIncrement(x)
_G[x] = _G[x] + 1
return _G[x]
end
... preIncrement("x") ...
For locals and function parameters (which are locals to) I know at the time I'm parsing the crement that it is local, I can store four flags to tell me which of the four crements is being used in the variables AST structure. Then when it comes time to output the variables definition, I can output something like this -
local x;
function preIncrement_x() x = x + 1; return x; end
function postDecrement_x() local y = x; x = x - 1; return y; end
... preIncrement_x() ...
In most of your assessment of configurability to the code. You are trying to hard pass data types from one into another. And call it a 'translator'. And in all of this you miss regex and other pattern match capacities. Which are far more present in LUA than LSL. And since the LSL code is being passed into LUA. Try using them, along with other functions. Which would define the work more as a translator, than a hard pass.
Yes I know this was asked a while ago. Though, for other viewers of this topic. Never forget the environments you are working in. EVER. Use what they give you to the best ability you can.