Related
I accidentally did (the equivalent of) the following:
lists:foldl(fun(X, Acc) -> [X|Acc] end, 0, List).
Note the not-a-list initial value for the accumulator.
This resulted in an improper list. This means that length, etc., don't work on it.
Given that my "equivalent of" took an hour to run, and I don't want to run it again, how do I repair my improper list?
For a simpler example of an improper list and the problem that it causes:
1> L = [1|[2|[3|4]]].
[1,2,3|4]
2> length(L).
** exception error: bad argument
in function length/1
called as length([1,2,3|4])
If you want to preserve the "improper tail", this would be enough:
Fix = fun Fix([H | T]) -> [H | Fix(T)];
Fix(T) -> [T]
end.
Here is a possible approach:
Lister = fun L([], Acc) -> lists:reverse(Acc);
L([[_ | _] = H | T], Acc) -> L(T, [L(H, []) | Acc]);
L([[] | T], Acc) -> L(T, Acc);
L([H | T], Acc) -> L(T, [H | Acc]);
L(X, Acc) -> L([], [X | Acc])
end.
L = [[[1,[1|2]],1|2],1|[2|[3|4]]].
Lister(L, []).
% output [[[1,[1,2]],1,2],1,2,3,4]
For the simple case I had, with non-nested improper list, where I don't want the extra item (because it should have been an empty list and doesn't mean anything), this'll do it:
Fix = fun F([H|T], A) when is_list(T) -> F(T, [H|A]);
F([H|_], A) -> F([], [H|A]);
F([], A) -> lists:reverse(A)
end.
Fix(L, []).
you must use list for ACC
lists:foldl(fun(X, Acc) -> [X|Acc] end, 0, [1,2,3]).
result => [3,2,1|0]
but if you use [0] for ACC argument in lists:foldl/3 function like bellow
lists:foldl(fun(X, Acc) -> [X|Acc] end, [0], [1,2,3]).
result => [3,2,1,0]
Im working on some erlang functions and im also not allowed to use library functions. I have to define a function that drops every other element from a list, starting with the first element.
I have worked on something similar before but i could use BIFs and now i am struggling.
For example, alternate([1,2,3,four,5,6]) is [2,four,6]. I am not sure how to implement it.
spec drop_word(string()) -> string().
drop_word([]) -> [];
drop_word([O|Op]) -> case wsp(O) of
true -> Op;
false -> drop_word(Op)
end.
alternate(List) ->
alternate(List, _Index=0).
alternate([_|T], Index) when Index rem 2 == 0 -> %even indexes
alternate(T, Index+1);
alternate([H|T], Index) when Index rem 2 == 1 -> %odd indexes
[H | alternate(T, Index+1)];
alternate([], _Index) ->
[].
In the shell:
12> a:alternate([1,2,3,four,5,6]).
[2,four,6]
13> a:alternate([1,2,3,four,5]).
[2,four]
But, that can be simplified to:
alternate(List) ->
evens(List).
evens([_|T]) ->
odds(T);
evens([]) -> [].
odds([H|T]) ->
[H | evens(T)];
odds([]) -> [].
In the shell:
6> a:alternate([1,2,3,four,5,6]).
[2,four,6]
7> a:alternate([1,2,3,four,5]).
[2,four]
Here's an accumulator version:
alternate(List) ->
evens(List, []).
evens([_|T], Acc) ->
odds(T, Acc);
evens([], Acc) ->
lists:reverse(Acc).
odds([H|T], Acc) ->
evens(T, [H|Acc]);
odds([], Acc) ->
lists:reverse(Acc).
In the shell:
20> a:alternate([1,2,3,four,5,6]).
[2,four,6]
21> a:alternate([1,2,3,four,5]).
[2,four]
Note that lists:reverse() is highly optimized, so you would never do List ++ [X] many times, which traverses the whole list every time you add an element to the end of the list. Rather, you should always choose to add an element to the head of a list, then call lists:reverse(). Oh yeah, no library functions...a reverse() function is easy to implement yourself, and although it won't be optimized like the erlang version, it will still be more efficient than doing List ++ [X] multiple times.
You can use two atoms drop and keep two match the alternating clauses of do_alternate. Details below in comments.
-module(so).
-export([alternate/1]).
% The exported function starts the actual function and tells it to match the `drop`
% clause. Kept elements of L will be collected in the third argument.
alternate(L) -> do_alternate(drop, L, []).
% The `drop` clause will call the `keep` clause and pass the tail T and the
% currently collected list Acc. The head H will be dropped.
do_alternate(drop, [_|T], Acc) -> do_alternate(keep, T, Acc);
% The `keep` clause will call the `drop` claues and pass the tail T and the
% currently collected list Acc with the head H prepented to it.
do_alternate(keep, [H|T], Acc) -> do_alternate(drop, T, Acc ++ [H]);
% If the arugment list is empty, return the accumulated list.
do_alternate(_, [], Acc) -> Acc.
Example usage:
> c(so).
{ok,so}
9> so:alternate([1,2,3,4,5,6]).
[2,4,6]
10> so:alternate([1,2,3,4,5,6,seven,eight,nine,ten,eleven]).
[2,4,6,eight,ten]
It seems that you want to drop any elements with position which is even. So you can do it like below:
-module(test).
-compile([export_all,debug_info]).
alternate(L) -> do_alternate(L, 0, length(L)).
do_alternate(_, L, L) -> [];
do_alternate([H|T], N, L) ->
case (N band 1) == 0 of
true -> do_alternate(T, N+1, L);
false -> [H] ++ do_alternate(T, N+1, L)
end.
Result in shell:
1> c(test).
test.erl:2: Warning: export_all flag enabled - all functions will be exported
{ok,test}
2> test:alternate([1,2,3,four,5,6]).
[2,four,6]
Moreover, if your List only has integer numbers, so you can use BIF like below:
3> lists:partition(fun(A) -> A rem 2 == 1 end, [1,2,3,4,5,6]).
{[1,3,5],[2,4,6]}
You could pattern match on the list, taking two elements at a time:
alternate([_Odd, Even | T]) ->
[Even] ++ alternate(T);
alternate([]) ->
[].
The specification doesn't say what happens if the list has an odd number of elements, so this function will just crash with a "function clause" error in that case. You could add a third clause to handle that - presumably dropping the last element would be a sensible thing to do:
alternate([_Last]) ->
[];
The title^ is kinda confusing but I will illustrate what I want to achieve:
I have:
[{<<"5b71d7e458c37fa04a7ce768">>,<<"5b3f77502dfe0deeb8912b42">>,<<"1538077790705827">>},
{<<"5b71d7e458c37fa04a7ce768">>,<<"5b3f77502dfe0deeb8912b42">>,<<"1538078530667847">>},
{<<"5b71d7e458c37fa04a7ce768">>,<<"5b3f77502dfe0deeb8912b42">>,<<"1538077778390908">>},
{<<"5b71d7e458c37fa04a7ce768">>,<<"5bad45b1e990057961313822">>,<<"1538082492283531">>
}]
I want to convert it to a list like this:
[
{<<"5b3f77502dfe0deeb8912b42">>,
[{<<"5b71d7e458c37fa04a7ce768">>,<<"5b3f77502dfe0deeb8912b42">>,<<"1538077790705827">>},
{<<"5b71d7e458c37fa04a7ce768">>,<<"5b3f77502dfe0deeb8912b42">>,<<"1538078530667847">>},
{<<"5b71d7e458c37fa04a7ce768">>,<<"5b3f77502dfe0deeb8912b42">>,<<"1538077778390908">>}
]},
{<<"5bad45b1e990057961313822">>,
[{<<"5b71d7e458c37fa04a7ce768">>,<<"5bad45b1e990057961313822">>,<<"1538082492283531">>}
]}
]
List of tuples [{id, [<List>]}, {id2, [<List>]} ] where ids are the second item of the tuple of the original list
Example :
<<"5b71d7e458c37fa04a7ce768">>,<<"5b3f77502dfe0deeb8912b42">>,<<"1538077790705827">>
Erlang newbie here. I created a dict with the second members of the tuples as keys and lists of corresponding tuples as values, then used dict:fold to transform it into the expected output format.
-export([test/0, transform/1]).
transform([H|T]) ->
transform([H|T], dict:new()).
transform([], D) ->
lists:reverse(
dict:fold(fun (Key, Tuples, Acc) ->
lists:append(Acc,[{Key,Tuples}])
end,
[],
D));
transform([Tuple={_S1,S2,_S3}|T], D) ->
transform(T, dict:append_list(S2, [Tuple], D)).
test() ->
Input=[{<<"5b71d7e458c37fa04a7ce768">>,<<"5b3f77502dfe0deeb8912b42">>,<<"1538077790705827">>},
{<<"5b71d7e458c37fa04a7ce768">>,<<"5b3f77502dfe0deeb8912b42">>,<<"1538078530667847">>},
{<<"5b71d7e458c37fa04a7ce768">>,<<"5b3f77502dfe0deeb8912b42">>,<<"1538077778390908">>},
{<<"5b71d7e458c37fa04a7ce768">>,<<"5bad45b1e990057961313822">>,<<"1538082492283531">>}
],
Output=transform(Input),
case Output of
[
{<<"5b3f77502dfe0deeb8912b42">>,
[{<<"5b71d7e458c37fa04a7ce768">>,<<"5b3f77502dfe0deeb8912b42">>,<<"1538077790705827">>},
{<<"5b71d7e458c37fa04a7ce768">>,<<"5b3f77502dfe0deeb8912b42">>,<<"1538078530667847">>},
{<<"5b71d7e458c37fa04a7ce768">>,<<"5b3f77502dfe0deeb8912b42">>,<<"1538077778390908">>}
]},
{<<"5bad45b1e990057961313822">>,
[{<<"5b71d7e458c37fa04a7ce768">>,<<"5bad45b1e990057961313822">>,<<"1538082492283531">>}
]}
] -> ok;
_Else -> error
end.
I think I see what you're after... Please correct me if I'm wrong.
There are a number of ways to do this, it really just depends on what sort of data structure you're interested in using to check the presence of like-keys. I'll show you two fundamentally different ways to do this and a third hybrid method that has become recently available:
Indexed data types (in this case a map)
List operations with matching
Hybrid matching over map keys
Since you're new I'll use the first case to demonstrate two ways of writing it: explicit recursion and using an actual list function from the lists module.
Indexy Data Types
The first way we'll do this is to use a hash table (aka "dict", "map", "hash", "K/V", etc.) and explicitly recurse through the elements, checking for the presence of the key encountered and adding it if it is missing, or appending to the list of values it points to if it does. We'll use an Erlang map for this. At the end of the function we'll convert the utility map back to a list:
explicit_convert(List) ->
Map = explicit_convert(List, maps:new()),
maps:to_list(Map).
explicit_convert([H | T], A) ->
K = element(2, H),
NewA =
case maps:is_key(K, A) of
true ->
V = maps:get(K, A),
maps:put(K, [H | V], A);
false ->
maps:put(K, [H], A)
end,
explicit_convert(T, NewA);
explicit_convert([], A) ->
A.
There is nothing wrong with explicit recursion (it is particularly good if you're new, because every part of it is left in the open to be examined), but this is a "left fold" and we already have a library function that abstracts a little bit of the plumbing out. So we really only need to write a function that checks for the presence of an element, and adds the key or appends the value:
fun_convert(List) ->
Map = lists:foldl(fun convert/2, maps:new(), List),
maps:to_list(Map).
convert(H, A) ->
K = element(2, H),
case maps:is_key(K, A) of
true ->
V = maps:get(K, A),
maps:put(K, [H | V], A);
false ->
maps:put(K, [H], A)
end.
Listy Conversion
The other major way we could have done this is with listy matching. To do that you need to first guarantee that your elements are sorted on the element you want to use as a key so that you can use it as a sort of "working element" and match on it. The code should be pretty easy to understand once you stare at it for a bit (maybe write out how it will step through your list by hand on paper once if you're totally perplexed):
listy_convert(List) ->
[T = {_, K, _} | Rest] = lists:keysort(2, List),
listy_convert(Rest, {K, [T]}, []).
listy_convert([T = {_, K, _} | Rest], {K, Ts}, Acc) ->
listy_convert(Rest, {K, [T | Ts]}, Acc);
listy_convert([T = {_, K, _} | Rest], Done, Acc) ->
listy_convert(Rest, {K, [T]}, [Done | Acc]);
listy_convert([], Done, Acc) ->
[Done | Acc].
Note that we split the list immediately after sorting it. The reason is that we have "prime the pump", so to speak, on the first call we make to listy_convert/3. This also means that this function will crash if you pass it an empty list. You can solve that by adding a clause to listy_convert/1 that matches on the empty list [].
A Final Bit of Magic
With those firmly in mind... consider that we also have a bit of a hybrid option available in newer versions of Erlang due to the magical syntax available to maps. We can match (most values) on map keys inside of a case clause (though we can't unify on a key value provided by other arguments within a function head):
map_convert(List) ->
maps:to_list(map_convert(List, #{})).
map_convert([T = {_, K, _} | Rest], Acc) ->
case Acc of
#{K := Ts} -> map_convert(Rest, Acc#{K := [T | Ts]});
_ -> map_convert(Rest, Acc#{K => [T]})
end;
map_convert([], Acc) ->
Acc.
Here is a one-liner that would produce your expected result:
[{K, [E || {_, K2, _} = E <- List, K =:= K2]} || {_, K, _} <- lists:ukeysort(2, List)].
What’s going on here? Let’s do it step by step…
This is your original list
List = […],
lists:ukeysort/2 leaves just one element per key in the list
OnePerKey = lists:ukeysort(2, List),
We then extract the keys with the first list comprehension
Keys = [K || {_, K, _} <- OnePerKey],
With the second list comprehension, we find the elements with the key…
fun Filter(K, List) ->
[E || {_, K2, _} = E <- List, K =:= K2]
end
Keep in mind that we can’t just pattern-match with K in the generator (i.e. [E || {_, K, _} = E <- List]) because generators in LCs introduce new scope for the variables.
Finally, putting all together…
[{K, Filter(K, List)} || K <- Keys]
It really depends on your dataset. For lager data sets using maps is a bit more efficient.
-module(test).
-export([test/3, v1/2, v2/2, v3/2, transform/1, do/2]).
test(N, Keys, Size) ->
List = [{<<"5b71d7e458c37fa04a7ce768">>,rand:uniform(Keys),<<"1538077790705827">>} || I <- lists:seq(1,Size)],
V1 = timer:tc(test, v1, [N, List]),
V2 = timer:tc(test, v2, [N, List]),
V3 = timer:tc(test, v3, [N, List]),
io:format("V1 took: ~p, V2 took: ~p V3 took: ~p ~n", [V1, V2, V3]).
v1(N, List) when N > 0 ->
[{K, [E || {_, K2, _} = E <- List, K =:= K2]} || {_, K, _} <- lists:ukeysort(2, List)],
v1(N-1, List);
v1(_,_) -> ok.
v2(N, List) when N > 0 ->
do(List,maps:new()),
v2(N-1, List);
v2(_,_) -> ok.
v3(N, List) when N > 0 ->
transform(List),
v3(N-1, List);
v3(_,_) -> ok.
do([], R) -> maps:to_list(R);
do([H={_,K,_}|T], R) ->
case maps:get(K,R,null) of
null -> NewR = maps:put(K, [H], R);
V -> NewR = maps:update(K, [H|V], R)
end,
do(T, NewR).
transform([H|T]) ->
transform([H|T], dict:new()).
transform([], D) ->
lists:reverse(
dict:fold(fun (Key, Tuples, Acc) ->
lists:append(Acc,[{Key,Tuples}])
end,
[],
D));
transform([Tuple={_S1,S2,_S3}|T], D) ->
transform(T, dict:append_list(S2, [Tuple], D)).
Running both with 100 unique keys and 100,000 records I get:
> test:test(1,100,100000).
V1 took: {75566,ok}, V2 took: {32087,ok} V3 took: {887362,ok}
ok
I am new to erlang and am trying to implement a simple function as follows:
% * ChatServers is a dictionary of usernames with tuples of the form:
% {server, Pid, Reference,LoggedInUsers}
get_chat_server([], _) ->
undefined;
get_chat_server([Key|_], ChatServers) ->
{server, Pid, Reference,LoggedInUsers} = dict:fetch(Key,ChatServers),
LoggedInUsers < 100,
{server, Pid, Reference,LoggedInUsers};
get_chat_server([_|T], ChatServers) ->
get_chat_server(T, ChatServers).
Basically what I am trying to do is find the first tuple of my dictionary whose LoggedInUsers number is less than 100.
However, once I compile my code, I get the following 2 warnings:
main_server_distributed.erl:63: Warning: use of operator '<' has no
effect main_server_distributed.erl:66: Warning: this clause cannot
match because a previous clause at line 61 always matches
I have some experience with prolog and as far as I recall this is a valid use of pattern matching and recursion. Could you please point out what am I doing wrong here? Thanks in advance.
The body of a clause (everything to the right of the ->) is not a list of conditions to fulfil, but simply a comma-separated list of expressions to evaluate. All resulting values except from that of the last expression will be discarded. Hence, the boolean value of your < comparison is not used anywhere.
You can do something like this...
get_chat_server([], _) ->
undefined;
get_chat_server([Key|T], ChatServers) ->
{server, Pid, Reference,LoggedInUsers} = dict:fetch(Key,ChatServers),
if
LoggedInUsers < 100 ->
{server, Pid, Reference,LoggedInUsers};
true ->
get_chat_server(T, ChatServers)
end.
Or this
get_chat_server([], _) ->
undefined;
get_chat_server([Key|T], ChatServers) ->
Result = dict:fetch(Key,ChatServers),
case Result of
{_, _, _, LoggedInUsers} when LoggedInUsers < 100 ->
Result;
_ ->
get_chat_server(T, ChatServers)
end.
main_server_distributed.erl:66: Warning: this clause cannot match
because a previous clause at line 61 always matches
You've essentially written:
get_chat_server(NonEmptyList, ChatServers) ->
{server, Pid, Reference,LoggedInUsers} = dict:fetch(Key,ChatServers),
LoggedInUsers < 100,
{server, Pid, Reference,LoggedInUsers};
get_chat_server(NonEmptyList, ChatServers) ->
get_chat_server(T, ChatServers).
Therefore, the first clause will always match anything that the second clause would have matched. More specifically, in the pattern:
[Key|_]
Key will match anything and _ will match anything. Likewise, in the pattern:
[_|T]
_ will match anything, and T will match anything.
Riffing off #dsmith's answer:
-module(my).
-export([get_chat_server/3, get_chat_server_test/0]).
get_chat_server(_MaxLoggedIn, []=_Keys, _ChatServers) ->
none;
get_chat_server(MaxLoggedIn, [Key|Keys], ChatServers) ->
get_chat_server(MaxLoggedIn, Keys, ChatServers, dict:fetch(Key, ChatServers) ).
get_chat_server(MaxLoggedIn, _, _, {_,_,_,LoggedInUsers}=ChatServer) when LoggedInUsers < MaxLoggedIn ->
ChatServer;
get_chat_server(MaxLoggedIn, [Key|Keys], ChatServers, _ChatServer) ->
get_chat_server(MaxLoggedIn, Keys, ChatServers, dict:fetch(Key, ChatServers) ).
%---------
get_chat_server_test() ->
Keys = [a, c],
ChatServers = [
{a, {server, a, a_, 200}},
{b, {server, b, b_, 100}},
{c, {server, c, c_, 30}}
],
ChatServerDict = dict:from_list(ChatServers),
none = get_chat_server(10, [], ChatServerDict),
{server, c, c_, 30} = get_chat_server(50, Keys, ChatServerDict),
{server, c, c_, 30} = get_chat_server(150, Keys, ChatServerDict),
PossibleResults = sets:from_list([{server,a,a_, 200},{server,c,c_,30}]),
true = sets:is_element(
get_chat_server(250, Keys, ChatServerDict),
PossibleResults
),
all_tests_passed.
You can also use higher order functions, i.e. dict:fold(), to get a list of all the ChatServers that meet your requirements:
max_fun(Max, Keys) ->
fun(Key, {_,_,_,LoggedInUsers}=Server, Acc) ->
case lists:member(Key, Keys) andalso LoggedInUsers<Max of
true -> [Server | Acc];
false -> Acc
end
end.
In the shell:
44> ChatServers = [
44> {a, {server, a, a_, 200}},
44> {b, {server, b, b_, 100}},
44> {c, {server, c, c_, 30}}
44> ].
[{a,{server,a,a_,200}},
{b,{server,b,b_,100}},
{c,{server,c,c_,30}}]
45> ChatServerDict = dict:from_list(ChatServers).
{dict,3,16,16,8,80,48,
{[],[],[],[],[],[],[],[],[],[],[],[],[],[],[],[]},
{{[],
[[a|{server,a,a_,200}]],
[[b|{server,b,b_,100}]],
[[c|{server,c,c_,30}]],
[],[],[],[],[],[],[],[],[],[],[],[]}}}
46> Keys = [a,c].
[a,c]
47> MaxLoggedIn = 150.
150
50> F = my:max_fun(MaxLoggedIn, Keys).
#Fun<fl.0.128553666>
51> dict:fold(F, [], ChatServerDict).
[{server,c,c_,30}]
I have a list in erlang containing interger values.
I want to remove values that occur only one time.(Not Duplicates).
Input = [1,3,2,1,2,2]
Output = [1,2,1,2,2]
I am newbie to erlang. I have tried an approach to sorting them first using list:sort() and then removing a member if the member next to it is the same.
I am having trouble trying to iterate the list. It would be great help if you can show me how I can do it.
multiple(L) ->
M = L -- lists:usort(L),
[X || X <- L , lists:member(X,M)].
Use map to count values and then filter values which was not present just once.
-module(test).
-export([remove_unique/1]).
remove_unique(L) ->
Count = lists:foldl(fun count/2, #{}, L),
lists:filter(fun(X) -> maps:get(X, Count) =/= 1 end, L).
count(X, M) ->
maps:put(X, maps:get(X, M, 0) + 1, M).
And test:
1> c(test).
{ok,test}
2> test:remove_unique([1,2,3,3,3,5,5,6,7,7]).
[3,3,3,5,5,7,7]
3> test:remove_unique([1,2,3,3,3,5,5,6,7,8]).
[3,3,3,5,5]
4> test:remove_unique([1,3,2,1,2,2]).
[1,2,1,2,2]
Here's a solution I'd written when first seeing the question when posted, that uses the same logic as #A.Sarid's recursion/pattern matching answer, except that I use a "Last" parameter instead of the count.
-module(only_dupes).
-export([process/1]).
process([]) -> [];
process(L) when is_list(L) ->
[H|T] = lists:sort(L),
lists:sort(process(undefined, H, T, [])).
process(Last, Curr, [], Acc)
when Curr =/= Last ->
Acc;
process(_Last, Curr, [], Acc) ->
[Curr | Acc];
process(Last, Curr, [Next | Rest], Acc)
when Curr =/= Last, Curr =/= Next ->
process(Curr, Next, Rest, Acc);
process(_Last, Curr, [Next | Rest], Acc) ->
process(Curr, Next, Rest, [Curr | Acc]).
One way for iterating a list (that as a result will return a new list) is using recursion and pattern matching.
After you sort your list you want to iterate the list and to check not only that it is different from the next element, but that there was no other equal elements before it. Consider the list [3,3,3,5,5] if you will only check the next element, the last 3 will also be unique and that is incorrect.
Here is a working program, I used a counter to cover the above case as well. See the syntax for using [H|T] for iterating over the list. You may see more cases and read more about it here.
-module(test).
-export([remove_unique/1]).
remove_unique(Input) ->
Sorted = lists:sort(Input),
remove_unique(Sorted, [], 0).
% Base case - checks if element is unique
remove_unique([H|[]],Output,Count) ->
case Count of
0 -> Output;
_Other -> [H|Output]
end;
% Count is 0 - might be unique - check with next element
remove_unique([H1|[H2|T]],Output, 0)->
case (H1 =:= H2) of
true -> remove_unique([H2|T],[H1|Output],1);
false -> remove_unique([H2|T],Output,0)
end;
% Count is > 0 - not unique - proceed adding to list until next value
remove_unique([H1|[H2|T]],Output,Count) ->
case (H1 =:= H2) of
true -> remove_unique([H2|T],[H1|Output],Count+1);
false -> remove_unique([H2|T],[H1|Output],0)
end.
Test
7> test:remove_unique([1,2,3,3,3,5,5,6,7,7]).
[7,7,5,5,3,3,3]
8> test:remove_unique([1,2,3,3,3,5,5,6,7,8]).
[5,5,3,3,3]