How to use lists:duplicate? - erlang

I would like to know if its possible to use lists:duplicate in this case:
decompress_1([])->
[];
decompress_1(L)->
MyNum = lists:map(fun(T)-> element(1,T) end,L),
Res = lists:map(fun(T)-> element(2,T) end,L).
to get :
decompress_1([{3,1},{3,2},{1,5},{1,4},{1,1},{1,0},{1,1}]) == [1,1,1,2,2,2,5,4,1,0,1]
I just manage to retrieve the first and second elements of the tuple.
There is a solution with list comprehension but I would know to do it without.
decompress([]) ->
[];
decompress(L) ->
[Y || {X, Y} <- L, _ <- lists:seq(1, X)].

Without using a list comprehension, we can use lists:duplicate/2 to create the result, but we have to flatten it to get the desired final answer:
decompress([]) ->
[];
decompress(L) ->
lists:flatten(lists:map(fun({X,Y}) ->
lists:duplicate(X,Y)
end, L)).
Without the flatten we'd get the first result shown below, instead of the second correct result:
1> decompress_no_flatten([{3,1},{3,2},{1,5},{1,4},{1,1},{1,0},{1,1}]).
[[1,1,1],[2,2,2],[5],[4],[1],[0],[1]]
2> decompress([{3,1},{3,2},{1,5},{1,4},{1,1},{1,0},{1,1}]).
[1,1,1,2,2,2,5,4,1,0,1]
By the way, you can use lists:duplicate/2 in the original list comprehension approach as well:
decompress([]) ->
[];
decompress(L) ->
[Y || {X,Y} <- L, _ <- lists:duplicate(X,Y)].
This works because here we don't use the values produced by lists:seq/2 or lists:duplicate/2, but rather we use only the number of items they produce.

Related

Sorting indexes in list of lists - F#

Currently I have a function to return the first elements of each list (floats), within a list to a separate list.
let firstElements list =
match list with
| head::_ -> head
| [] -> 0.00
My question is, how do I expand this to return elements at the same index into different lists while I don't know how long this list is? For example
let biglist = [[1;2;3];[4;5;6];[7;8;9]]
If I did not know the length of this list, what is the most efficient and safest way to get
[[1;4;7];[2;5;8];[3;6;9]]
List.transpose has been added recently to FSharp.Core
let biglist = [[1;2;3];[4;5;6];[7;8;9]]
let res = biglist |> List.transpose
//val res : int list list = [[1; 4; 7]; [2; 5; 8]; [3; 6; 9]]
You can use the recent added List.transpose function. But it is always good to be good enough to create such functions yourself. If you want to solve the problem yourself, think of a general algorithm to solve your problem. One would be.
From the first element of each list you create a new list
You drop the first element of each list
If you end with empty lists you end, otherwise repeat at step 1)
This could be the first attempt to solve the Problem. Function names are made up, at this point.
let transpose lst =
if allEmpty lst
then // Some Default value, we don't know yet
else ...
The else branch looks like following. First we want to pick the first element of every element. We imagine a function pickFirsts that do this task. So we could write pickFirsts lst. The result is a list that itself is the first element of a new list.
The new list is the result of the remaining list. First we imagine again a function that drops the first element of every sub-list dropFirsts lst. On that list we need to repeat step 1). We do that by a recursive call to transpose.
Overall we get:
let rec transpose lst =
if allEmpty lst
then // Some Default value, we don't know yet
else (pickFirsts lst) :: (transpose (dropFirsts lst))
At this point we can think of the default value. transpose needs to return a value in the case it ends up with an empty list of empty lists. As we use the result of transpose to add an element to it. The results of it must be a list. And the best default value is an empty list. So we end up with.
let rec transpose lst =
if allEmpty lst
then []
else (pickFirsts lst) :: (transpose (dropFirsts lst))
Next we need to implement the remaining functions allEmpty, pickFirsts and dropFirsts.
pickFirst is easy. We need to iterate over each element, and must return the first value. We get the first value of a list by List.head, and iterating over it and turning every element into a new list is what List.map does.
let pickFirsts lst = List.map List.head lst
dropFirsts need to iterate ver each element, and just remove the first element, or in other words keeps the remaining/tail of a list.
let dropFirsts lst = List.map List.tail lst
The remaining allEmpty is a predicate that either return true/false if we have an empty list of lists or not. With a return value of bool, we need another function that allows to return another type is a list. This is usually the reason to use List.fold. An implementation could look like this:
let allEmpty lst =
let folder acc x =
match x with
| [] -> acc
| _ -> false
List.fold folder true lst
It starts with true as the default value. As long it finds empty lists it returns the default value unchanged. As soon there is one element found, in any list, it will return false (Not Empty) as the new default value.
The whole code:
let allEmpty lst =
let folder acc x =
match x with
| [] -> acc
| _ -> false
List.fold folder true lst
let pickFirsts lst = List.map List.head lst
let dropFirsts lst = List.map List.tail lst
let rec transpose lst =
if allEmpty lst
then []
else (pickFirsts lst) :: (transpose (dropFirsts lst))
transpose [[1;2;3];[4;5;6];[7;8;9]]
Another approach would be to turn it into a 2 dimensional mutable array. Also do length checkings. Do the transformation and return the mutable array again as an immutable list.

F# Change element in list and return full new list

I have a list of type (string * (int * int)) list. I want to be able to search through the list, finding the right element by it's string identifier, do a calculation on one of the ints, and then return the full, modified list.
Example:
Given a list
let st = [("a1",(100,10)); ("a2",(50,20)); ("a3",(25,40))]
I'm trying to make a function which gets one of the elements and subtracts number from one of the ints in the tuple.
get ("a2",10) st
//Expected result: st' = [("a1",(100,10)); ("a2",(40,20)); ("a3",(25,40))]
I feel I'm almost there, but am a little stuck with the following function:
let rec get (a,k) st =
match st with
| (a',(n',p'))::rest when a'=a && k<=n' -> (n'-k,p')::rest
| (a',(n',p'))::rest -> (n',p')::get (a,k) rest
| _ -> failwith "Illegal input"
This returns [("a2",(40,20)); ("a3",(25,40))] and is thus missing the first a1 element. Any hints?
Lists are immutable, so if you want to "change one element" you are really creating a new list with one element transformed. The easiest way to do a transformation like this is to use List.map function. I would write something like:
let updateElement key f st =
st |> List.map (fun (k, v) -> if k = key then k, f v else k, v)
updateElement is a helper that takes a key, update function and an input. It returns list where the element with the given key has been transformed using the given function. For example, to increment the first number associated with a2, you can write:
let st = [("a1",(100,10)); ("a2",(50,20)); ("a3",(25,40))]
st |> updateElement "a2" (fun (a, b) -> a + 10, b)
I was looking for a function which would update an element in a list based on the element's data. I couldn't find one in F#5, so wrote one using Tomas' solution:
let updateAt (elemFindFunc: 'a -> bool) (newElem: 'a) (source: 'a list) : 'a list =
source
|> List.map
(fun elem ->
let foundElem = elemFindFunc elem
if foundElem then newElem else elem)
elemFindFunc is the function which consumes an element and returns true if this is the element we want to replace. If this function returns true for multiple elements, then those will be replaced by newElem. Also, if elemFindFunc evaluates to false for all elements, the list will be unaltered.
newElem is the new value you want to replace with. newElem could be replaced by a function like valueFunc: 'a -> 'a if you want to process the element before inserting it.

Find the minimum value in a map

I have a map organized as follows.Key is a simple term lets say an integer but the value is complex tuple {BB,CC,DD}. What is the best way to find the minimum CC in the map ? So far I have the following
-module(test).
-author("andre").
%% API
-export([init/0]).
init() ->
TheMap = build(maps:new(), 20),
io:format("Map: ~p~n", [TheMap]),
AKey = hd(maps:keys(TheMap)),
AValue = maps:get(AKey, TheMap),
maps:fold(fun my_min/3, {AKey, AValue}, TheMap).
build(MyMap, Count) when Count == 0 ->
MyMap;
build(MyMap, Count) ->
NewMap = maps:put(Count, {random:uniform(100), random:uniform(100), random:uniform(100)}, MyMap),
build(NewMap, Count - 1).
my_min(Key, {A,B,C}, {MinKey, {AA,BB,CC}}) ->
if B < BB -> {Key, {A,B,C}};
B >= BB -> {MinKey, {AA,BB,CC}}
end.
My map is small so I am not too worried about the usage of AKey and AValue to find initial values for the fold, but I was wondering if there was a better way, or other data structure.
--
Thanks.
What you have is close to a good solution, but it can be improved. There's no need to dig out the first key and value to use an the initial value for the fold, since you can just pass an artificial value instead and make your fold function deal with it. Also, you can improve your use of pattern matching in function heads. Lastly, use start instead of init since that makes it easier to invoke when calling erl from the command line.
Here's an improved version:
-module(test).
-author("andre").
%% API
-export([start/0]).
start() ->
TheMap = build(maps:new(), 20),
io:format("Map: ~p~n", [TheMap]),
maps:fold(fun my_min/3, {undefined, undefined}, TheMap).
build(MyMap, 0) ->
MyMap;
build(MyMap, Count) ->
NewMap = maps:put(Count, {random:uniform(100), random:uniform(100), random:uniform(100)}, MyMap),
build(NewMap, Count - 1).
my_min(Key, Value, {undefined, undefined}) ->
{Key, Value};
my_min(Key, {_,B,_}=Value, {_, {_,BB,_}}) when B < BB ->
{Key, Value};
my_min(_Key, _Value, Acc) ->
Acc.
The my_min/3 fold function has three clauses. The first matches the special start value {undefined, undefined} and returns as the new accumulator value whatever {Key, Value} it was passed. The benefit of this is not only that you avoid special processing before starting the fold, but also that if the map is empty, you'll get the special value {undefined, undefined} as the result and you can handle it accordingly. The second clause uses a guard to check if B of the value is less than the BB value in the fold accumulator, and if it is, return {Key, Value} as the new accumulator value. The final clause just returns the existing accumulator value, since this clause is called only for values greater than or equal to that in the existing accumulator.
You might also look into using a simple list of key/value tuples, since for a small number of elements it might outperform a map. If your measurements indicate you should use a list, a similar fold would work for it as well.
-module(test).
-author("andre").
%% API
-export([init/0]).
init() ->
TheMap = build(maps:new(), 24),
io:format("Map: ~p~n", [TheMap]),
List = maps:to_list(TheMap),
io:format("List: ~p~n", [List]),
Fun = fun({_, {_, V1, _}} = Element, {_, {_, V2, _}}) when V1 < V2 ->
Element;
(_, Res) ->
Res
end,
Res = lists:foldl(Fun, hd(List), tl(List)),
io:format("Res: ~p~n", [Res]).
build(MyMap, Count) when Count == 0 ->
MyMap;
build(MyMap, Count) ->
NewMap = maps:put(Count, {random:uniform(100), random:uniform(100), random:uniform(100)}, MyMap),
build(NewMap, Count - 1).
You can use maps:to_list/1 to convert the map to a list, then you can use lists:foldl/3 to calculate the minimun value.

How To equal <<"xxxasdew">> , and '<<"xxxasdew">>' in erlang

I am having Data like the below:
Data = [{<<"status">>,<<"success">>},
{<<"META">>,
{struct,[{<<"createdat">>,1406895903.0},
{<<"user_email">>,<<"gopikrishnajonnada#gmail.com">>},
{<<"campaign">>,<<"5IVUPHE42HP1NEYvKb7qSvpX2Cm">>}]}},
{<<"mode">>,1}]
And Now i am having a
FieldList = ['<<"5IVUPHE42HP1NEYvKb7qSvpX2Cm">>']
Now:
I am trying like the below but i am getting empty instead of the value
90> [L || L <- FieldList,proplists:get_value(<<"campaign">>,element(2,proplists:get_value(<<"META">>,Data,{[],[]}))) == L].
[]
so how to get the both values are equal and get the final value.
You can parse the atom as if it were an Erlang term:
atom_to_binary(Atom) ->
L = atom_to_list(Atom),
{ok, Tokens, _} = erl_scan:string(L ++ "."),
{ok, Result} = erl_parse:parse_term(Tokens),
Result.
You can then do
[L ||
L <- FieldList,
proplists:get_value(<<"campaign">>,
element(2,
proplists:get_value(<<"META">>,Data,{[],[]})))
== atom_to_binary(L)
].
You can also do it the other way round, (trying to) convert the binary to an atom using this function:
binary_literal_to_atom(Binary) ->
Literal = lists:flatten(io_lib:format("~p", [Binary])),
try
list_to_existing_atom(Literal)
catch
error:badarg -> undefined
end.
This function will return undefined if the atom is not known yet (s. Erlang: binary_to_atom filling up atom table space security issue for more information on this). This is fine here, since the match can only work if the atom was known before, in this case by being defined in the FieldList variable.
How did you get those values in the first place?
Data = [{<<"status">>,<<"success">>},
{<<"META">>,
{struct,[{<<"createdat">>,1406895903.0},
{<<"user_email">>,<<"gopikrishnajonnada#gmail.com">>},
{<<"campaign">>,<<"5IVUPHE42HP1NEYvKb7qSvpX2Cm">>}]
}
},
{<<"mode">>,1}].
[_,{_,{struct,InData}}|_] = Data.
[X || {<<"campaign">>,X} <- InData].
it gives you the result in the form : [<<"5IVUPHE42HP1NEYvKb7qSvpX2Cm">>]
of course you can use the same kind of code if the tuple {struct,InData} may be in a different place in the Data variable.
-module(wy).
-compile(export_all).
main() ->
Data = [{<<"status">>,<<"success">>},
{<<"META">>,
{struct,[{<<"createdat">>,1406895903.0},
{<<"user_email">>,<<"gopikrishnajonnada#gmail.com">>},
{<<"campaign">>,<<"5IVUPHE42HP1NEYvKb7qSvpX2Cm">>}]
}
},
{<<"mode">>,1}],
Fun = fun({<<"META">>, {struct, InData}}, Acc) ->
Value = proplists:get_value(<<"campaign">>, InData, []),
[Value | Acc];
(_Other, Acc)->
Acc
end,
lists:foldl(Fun, [], Data).
I think you can use this code.

Erlang basic recursion with guards

I am trying to create a very simple recursive function to delete all element that have a particular value that the user decides on from a list.
In haskell I would use guards and do:
deleteAll_rec _ [] = []
deleteAll_rec del (x:xs) | del==x = deleteAll_rec del xs
| otherwise = x:deleteAll_rec del xs
I am trying to code up an Erlang equivalent, however, I am not sure how to handle the otherwise case:
deleteAll_rec(_, []) -> [];
deleteAll_rec(DEL, [X|XS]) when DEL =:= X -> deleteAll_rec(DEL, XS).
I was wondering if someone can demonstrate how this can be done?
Many thanks in advance!
The otherwise becomes a separate clause in Erlang:
delete_all_rec(_, []) -> [];
delete_all_rec(Del, [Del|Xs]) ->
delete_all_rec(Del, Xs);
delete_all_rec(Del, [X|Xs]) ->
[X|delete_all_rec(Del, Xs)].
An alternative is to use an if like:
delete_all_rec(_, []) -> [];
delete_all_rec(Del, [X|Xs]) ->
if Del =:= X ->
delete_all_rec(Del, Xs);
true ->
[X|delete_all_rec(Del, Xs)]
end.
The resultant code is the same but I think the first version looks better. Whether you put the terminating case first or last is irrelevant in this example, I prefer putting it last.

Resources