I have a discriminated-union type of the form
type ParameterName = string
type ParameterValues =
| String of string[]
| Float of float[]
| Int of int[]
type Parameter = Parameter of ParameterName * ParameterValues
I want to pass the ParameterValues part to a function taking generic arguments returning unit, such as
let func1 (name:string) (data:'a) = printfn "%s" name
To deconstruct Parameter I could wrap func1 like this
let func2 (Parameter (name, values)) =
match values with
| String s -> func1 name s
| Float s -> func1 name s
| Int s -> func1 name s
however this is inconvenient if I have to do this for multiple functions. Instead, I would like to define a more flexible wrapper like this:
let func3 (fn: ('a -> 'b -> unit)) (Parameter (name, values)) =
match values with
| String s -> fn name s
| Float s -> fn name s
| Int s -> fn name s
This however fails, as the type of b gets restricted to string[] in the first option of the match expression; consequently the match expression fails with the error Type string does not match type float.
Is this expected? How can I work around this problem?
This is an expected behaviour. The problem is that you cannot directly pass a generic function as an argument to another function in F#. When you define a function as follows:
let func3 (fn: ('a -> 'b -> unit)) (Parameter (name, values)) = (...)
... you are defining a generic function func3 that has two generic parameters and, when those are specified, can be called with a given function and a parameter. This can be written as:
\forall 'a, 'b . (('a -> 'b -> unit) -> Parameter -> unit)
What you would need to do is to make those type parameters not top-level, but make the first parameter itself a generic function. You could write this as:
(\forall 'a, 'b . ('a -> 'b -> unit)) -> Parameter -> unit
This can be clumsily written in F# using interfaces:
type IFunction<'a> =
abstract Invoke<'b> : 'a -> 'b -> unit
let func1 =
{ new IFunction<string> with
member x.Invoke<'b> name (data:'b) = printfn "%s" name }
let func3 (fn: IFunction<string>) (Parameter (name, values)) =
match values with
| String s -> fn.Invoke name s
| Float s -> fn.Invoke name s
| Int s -> fn.Invoke name s
In practice, your function does not really need to be generic, because you are never using the second argument - but you could probably achieve pretty much anything that you can achieve with this interfaces trick just by passing the data as obj and your code would be significantly simpler than this monstrosity!
Following the suggestions by Lee and Tomas, I came up with the following solution:
type Parameter = Parameter of string * obj
let func0 (name:string) (data:obj) = printfn "%s %A" name data
let func1 (fn: string->obj->unit) (Parameter (name, value)) =
fn name value
let p1 = Parameter ("p1", [|"a"; "b"|])
let p2 = Parameter ("p1", [|1.; 2.|])
func1 func0 p1
func1 func0 p2
Related
I have a standard type that I use to pass messages and objects between functions that has an optional MessageObject that is System.Object.
type StatusMessage = {
Message: string
MessageObject: Object option
Success: bool
}
In the following specific function - I know that the Message Object will always contain the following specific type and I want to be able to access that within the function
type SingleCorrectRecord = {
CardTransactionWithOrder: CardWithOrder
Line: RowTransaction
ExchangeVariance: decimal
}
My function is:
let getEstimatedVariance(matchedTransactions: StatusMessage list): decimal =
let exchangeVariance:decimal =
matchedTransactions |> Seq.sumBy(fun mt -> mt.MessageObject.ExchangeVariance)
estimatedVariance
Obviously mt.MessageObject doesn't contain the property "ExchangeVariance" but I need to be able to cast (or unbox?) the object so that it knows that it is a SingleCorrectRecord type and I can access the properties.
Any help is appreciated.
You can nest the dynamic type test with the union case pattern in the same match expression:
let exchangeVariance =
matchedTransactions |> Seq.sumBy (fun mt ->
match mt.MessageObject with
| Some(:? SingleCorrectRecord as scr) -> scr.ExchangeVariance
| _ -> 0M )
// val exchangeVariance : decimal
:?> is the downcast operator (or :? within pattern matching) which can be used for this problem. However, it is typically not recommended to use downcasting, which can fail at runtime, in F# code.
As an alternative, you could structure your StatusMessage type to be generic or to use a discriminated union depending on whether messages with different payload types need to be stored in the same collection.
// This type can store any type of message however StatusMessage<SingleCorrectRecord> is
// a different type to StatusMessage<Other> and they can't be stored in the same collection.
type StatusMessage<'T> = {
Message: string
MessageObject: 'T option
Success: bool
}
let getEstimatedVariance(matchedTransactions: StatusMessage<SingleCorrectRecord> list): decimal =
let estimatedVariance:decimal =
matchedTransactions |> Seq.sumBy(fun mt ->
match mt.MessageObject with
| Some msg -> msg.ExchangeVariance
| None -> 0M )
estimatedVariance
If the messages need to be in a grouped collection you could define all messages in a MsgPayload discriminated union:
type MsgPayload =
| SingleCorrectRecord of SingleCorrectRecord
| Other of string
type StatusMessage2 = {
Message: string
MessageObject: MsgPayload option
Success: bool
}
let getEstimatedVariance2(matchedTransactions: StatusMessage2 list): decimal =
let estimatedVariance:decimal =
matchedTransactions |> Seq.sumBy(fun mt ->
match mt.MessageObject with
| Some (SingleCorrectRecord msg) -> msg.ExchangeVariance
| _ -> 0M )
estimatedVariance
I'm trying to use the "bind operator" (>>=) in my code.
If I use the operator I get a compile error, if I instead "inline" what the operator is supposed to do, it works.
type TestDI =
private
| A of string list
| B of int list
with
static member (>>=) (x: string list, f: TestDI -> 'a) =
f <| A x
let func (t: TestDI) =
match t with
| A _ -> "a"
| B _ -> "b"
// Expecting a type supporting the operator '>>=' but given a function type.
// You may be missing an argument to a function.
["a"] >>= func
// works
func <| A ["a"]
Obviously I'm missing something, can someone please help?
When you use an operator, F# looks for it in order:
as a let-defined operator;
as a static member-defined operator on one of the two arguments' types. Here, the arguments you are passing to the operator are string list and TestDI -> string, so it won't look at the one you defined on TestDI.
So here the solution would be to let-define it instead:
type TestDI =
private
| A of string list
| B of int list
let (>>=) (x: string list) (f: TestDI -> 'a) =
f <| A x
I have the next code (a parameter of a method) in C#:
Func<Func<string, Stream>, Action<string, string>, T> save
But I don't know if in F# is
save: ((string -> Stream) -> (string -> string -> unit)) -> 'T
or
save: (string -> Stream) -> (string -> string -> unit) -> 'T
Let's say that string -> Stream is 'a and string -> string -> unit is 'b and 'T is 'c.
Now that we've removed the higher order functions this is simpler to think about and the question boils down to this: What's the difference between the following type signatures?
('a -> 'b) -> 'c
'a -> 'b -> 'c
The first type is a function that takes a function from 'a to 'b as its only argument. The second one is a function that takes an 'a as its first argument and a 'b as its second argument. The second one is compatible with the C# type signature Func<A, B, C>.
I am trying figure out if a generic type wrapped in a rop result is a list or not. This is what I tried but I got errors.
let checkType (result : RopResult<'tSuccess, 'errors>) =
match result with
| Success (s, msg) ->
match s with
| :? [] -> // error here
Sample
let isList<'s> () = true
let processList (ls : 'domain list) = true
let processType (s : 'domain) = true
let checkType (result : RopResult<'tSuccess, 'errors>) =
match result with
| Success (s, msg) ->
match s with
| s when isList<s>() -> processList s
| _ -> processType s
| Failure (x) -> false
I'll first explain the technicalities of how to get your code to work, and then try to convince you (as the other folks on this thread) that it may not be the right way to approach your problem.
Firstly, your match statement has a syntax error. You would write the type test and the cast in one swoop as
match s with
| :? List<int> as theIntList -> ...do something with theIntList ...
When you add that to your code, the F# compiler will complain "The runtime coercion or type test ... involves an indeterminate type. ... Further type annotations are needed". Fix that by being more specific about what kind of result your checkType is processing: it is some System.Object instance and the message, so you'd write:
let checkType (result : Result<obj*string, 'errors>) =
match result with
| Success (s, msg) ->
match s with
| :? List<int> as theIntList -> ... do something
Note that you can't change that to a generic thing like List<_> - F# will do the type test and the cast in one go, and would not hence know what to cast to. If you try to, you will see warnings that your List<_> has been inferred to be List<obj>
Having said all that: Using obj is not the idiomatic way to go, as others have tried to point out already. The answers of #robkuz and #TheInnerLight contain all you need: A map function, functions that operate on individual result types, which then becomes nicely composable:
let map f x =
match x with
| Success (s, msg) -> Success (f s, msg)
| Failure f -> Failure f
// This will automatically be inferred to be of type Result<(int list * string), 'a>
let myFirstResult = Success ([1;2], "I've created an int list")
// This will automatically be inferred to be of type Result<(string list * string), 'a>
let mySecondResult = Success (["foo"; "bar"], "Here's a string list")
// Process functions for specific result types. No type tests needed!
let processIntList (l: int list) = Seq.sum l
let processStringList = String.concat "; "
// This will automatically be inferred to be of type Result<(int * string), 'a>
let mapFirst = myFirstResult |> map processIntList
// This will automatically be inferred to be of type Result<(string * string), 'a>
let mapSecond = mySecondResult |> map processStringList
I am not sure if I really understand your problem.
In general if you have some polymorphic type (like your RopResult) and you want to process the polymorphic part of it a good approach in F# would be
to disentagle your code into a wrapper code and a processor code where your processor code is delivered via a higher order function for the processing part.
Example:
type RopResult<'tSuccess, 'tError> =
| Success of 'tSuccess
| Error of 'tError
let checkType (process: 'tSuccess -> 'tResult) (result : RopResult<'tSuccess, 'tError>) =
match result with
| Success s -> process s |> Success
| Error e -> Error e
and
let processList (ls : 'domain list) = true
let processType (s : 'domain) = true
and then you
checkType processList aListWrappedInResult
checkType processType aTypeWrappedInResult
Assuming you wanted to determine whether a supplied value was of a generic list type, you could do this:
let isList value =
let valueType = value.GetType()
match valueType.IsGenericType with
|true -> valueType.GetGenericTypeDefinition() = typedefof<_ list>
|false -> false
Example usage:
isList [5];;
val it : bool = true
isList ["a", "b"];;
val it : bool = true
isList "a";;
val it : bool = false
When working with something like RopResult, or more formally, Either, it's helpful to define the map function. The map function takes a function 'a -> 'b and gives you a function which operates in some elevated domain, e.g. RopResult<'a,'c> -> RopResult<'b,'c>.
This is analogous to List.map : ('a ->'b) -> 'a List -> 'b List.
We define it like this:
let map f v =
match v with
|Success sv -> Success (f sv)
|Failure fv -> Failure (fv)
You can then use isList on RopResults by simply doing:
ropResult |> map isList
Others here are warning you in the comments that there may be potential issues surrounding how you actually process the results once you've determined whether the type is a list or not. Specifically, you will need to ensure that the return types of your processList and processType functions are the same (although I would recommend revisiting the naming of processType and call it processValue instead. Since you are not operating on the type, I think the name is confusing).
This function has the signature: (UnionCaseInfo -> bool) -> 'T option
let private findCase<'T> f =
match FSharpType.GetUnionCases typeof<'T> |> Array.filter f with
|[|case|] -> Some (FSharpValue.MakeUnion(case,[||]) :?> 'T)
|_ -> None
This function, which calls the above function, has the signature: int -> obj
let CreateFromId<'T> id =
match findCase (fun case -> case.Tag = id) with
| Some c -> c
| None -> failwith (sprintf "Lookup for union case by \"%d\" failed." id)
In the pattern for CreateFromId, intellisense shows that c is inferred to be of type obj, even though it shows the correct signature for findCase. Why does the type seem to have been "lost" in the pattern?
(I can workaround this by specifying the return type of CreateFromId to 'T)
Because the type parameter 'T is not referenced in the body of the function, so type inference has no way to know your intention was to name 'T the return type.
So you can either add it in the body as the return type (as you already figured it out) or remove it from the declaration:
let CreateFromId id = ...
By removing it works because F# does automatic generalization, the only different is it will use an arbitrary name for the type variable, but even if you want to name that type variable 'T what I would do is add it as a return type but no in the declaration between brackets:
let CreateFromId id : 'T = ...
The type of CreateFromId was inferred to by int -> obj because there's nothing "linking" the two 'T type arguments on your functions.
findCase is properly generic over 'T, but CreateFromId is only declared to be generic, and the generic type argument is never used.
Annotating the function with the desired type is good enough to make the types line up. You can also call findCase explicitly providing the type:
let CreateFromId<'T> id =
match findCase<'T> (fun case -> case.Tag = id) with
| Some c -> c
| None -> failwith (sprintf "Lookup for union case by \"%d\" failed." id)
Or as the other answer suggests, just drop the 'T from CreateFromId and let type inference do its thing.