I wrote the following function to view data in a grid from F# interactive:
open System.Windows.Forms
let grid x =
let form = new Form(Visible = true)
let data = new DataGridView(Dock = DockStyle.Fill)
form.Controls.Add(data)
data.DataSource <- x |> Seq.toArray
How can I make it work for both 1D and 2D seqs? say, grid [1,2,3] or grid[(1,0);(2,0);(3,0)];; works fine but grid [1;2;3];; would not work.
another question is, why do I have to add the `|>Seq.toArray to make it work?
DataGridView uses databinding that reflects over object properties and displays them in grid columns (possibly automatically inferred). [1,2,3] and [(1,0);(2,0);(3,0)] are lists of tuples so DataGridView can show tuple components, As opposite, [1;2;3] - list of integers, it doesn't contains any properties that exposes the actual value.
Seq.ToArray is necessary because DataSource expects IList, IListSource, IBindingList or IBindingListView (DataGridView.DataSource Property ). Array implements IList, F# list - doesn't.
As desco explains, the DataGridView control displays values of properties of the object.
This is pretty silly behavior for primitive types - for example if you specify [ "Hello"; "world!" ] as the data source, it will display column Length with values 5 and 6. That's definitely not what you'd want!
The best solution I could find is to explicitly check for strings and primitive types and wrap them in a simple type with just a single property (that will get displayed):
type Wrapper(s:obj) =
member x.Value = s.ToString()
let grid<'T> (x:seq<'T>) =
let form = new Form(Visible = true)
let data = new DataGridView(Dock = DockStyle.Fill)
form.Controls.Add(data)
data.AutoGenerateColumns <- true
if typeof<'T>.IsPrimitive || typeof<'T> = typeof<string> then
data.DataSource <- [| for v in x -> Wrapper(box v) |]
else
data.DataSource <- x |> Seq.toArray
grid [ 1 .. 10 ]
grid [ "Hello"; "World" ]
Related
Trying to learn F# and got stuck when trying to find a better approach of converting a csv file to a json array where each row + header is a json object in that array.
After some trial and error I finally caved and went for an ugly approach with mutable list and map. Are there any better ways this can be implemented?
let csvFileToJsonList (csvFile: FSharp.Data.CsvFile) =
let mutable tempList = List.empty<Map<string,string>>
let heads =
match csvFile.Headers with
| Some h -> h
| None -> [|"Missing"|] // what to do here?
let nbrOfColumns = csvFile.NumberOfColumns
for row in csvFile.Rows do
let columns = row.Columns
let mutable tempMap = Map.empty<string,string>
for i = 0 to nbrOfColumns-1 do
tempMap <- tempMap.Add(heads.[i], columns.[i])
tempList <- tempMap :: tempList
System.Text.Json.JsonSerializer.Serialize(tempList)
This outputs the following which is the goal:
[
{
"Header1": "Row1Val1",
"Header2": "Row1Val2",
"Header3": "Row1Val3",
"Header4": "Row1Val4",
"Header5": "Row1Val5"
},
{
"Header1": "Row2Val1",
"Header2": "Row2Val2",
"Header3": "Row2Val3",
"Header4": "Row2Val4",
"Header5": "Row2Val5"
}
]
This is about as simple as I could make it, although a longer version might be more readable for you:
let csvFileToJsonList (csvFile: FSharp.Data.CsvFile) =
let heads = csvFile.Headers |> Option.defaultValue [||]
csvFile.Rows
|> Seq.map (fun row -> Seq.zip heads row.Columns |> Map)
|> System.Text.Json.JsonSerializer.Serialize
This produces the output in the original order, which I'm assuming is preferable (your solution reverses the order).
This also assumes some headers exist, otherwise the output will be empty objects.
Description: For each row use Seq.zip to produce a sequence of header-value tuples. Pass that to the Map constructor to create a map, providing a sequence of maps, which can be serialized.
Note that using dict instead of Map might be a bit faster.
You also could use CsvProvider to create a typed object (Row)
open FSharp.Data
type Persons =
CsvProvider<"David,Raab,19.02.1983",
Schema="First (string), Last (string), BirthDay(string)",
HasHeaders=true>
let parseCsv (reader:System.IO.TextReader) = [
let data = Persons.Load reader
for row in data.Rows do
Map [
("First", row.First)
("Last", row.Last)
("Birthday", row.BirthDay)
]
]
Returning a List of a map instead of Json, but i guess you will know how to change it to Serialze the data.
Please consider this dataset, composed by man and woman, and that I filter in a second moment according to few variables:
type ls = JsonProvider<"...">
let dt = ls.GetSamples()
let dt2 =
dt |> Seq.filter (fun c -> c.Sex = "male" && c.Height > Some 150)
dt2
[{"sex":"male","height":180,"weight":85},
{"sex":"male","height":160" "weight":60},
{"sex":"male","height":180,"weight":85}]
Lets suppose that I would like to add a fourth key "body mass index" or "bmi", and that its value is roughly given by "weight"/"height". Hence I expect:
[{"sex":"male","height":180,"weight":85, "bmi":(180/85)},
{"sex":"male","height":160" "weight":60, "bmi":(160/60},
{"sex":"male","height":180,"weight":85, "bmi":(180/85)}]
I thought that map.Add may help.
let dt3 = dt2.Add("bmi", (dt2.Height/dt2.Weight))
Unfortunately, it returns an error:
error FS0039: The field, constructor or member 'Add' is not defined
I am sure there are further errors in my code, but without this function I cannot actually look for them. Am I, at least, approaching the problem correctly?
Creating modified versions of the JSON is sadly one thing that the F# Data type provider does not make particularly easy. What makes that hard is the fact that we can infer the type from the source JSON, but we cannot "predict" what kind of fields people might want to add.
To do this, you'll need to access the underlying representation of the JSON value and operate on that. For example:
type ls = JsonProvider<"""
[{"sex":"male","height":180,"weight":85},
{"sex":"male","height":160,"weight":60},
{"sex":"male","height":180,"weight":85}]""">
let dt = ls.GetSamples()
let newJson =
dt
|> Array.map (fun recd ->
// To do the calculation, you can access the fields via inferred types
let bmi = float recd.Height / float recd.Weight
// But now we need to look at the underlying value, check that it is
// a record and extract the properties, which is an array of key-value pairs
match recd.JsonValue with
| JsonValue.Record props ->
// Append the new property to the existing properties & re-create record
Array.append [| "bmi", JsonValue.Float bmi |] props
|> JsonValue.Record
| _ -> failwith "Unexpected format" )
// Re-create a new JSON array and format it as JSON
JsonValue.Array(newJson).ToString()
I'm writing my very first F# program, the aim being simply to learn F#.
What I want to is provide a list of dates, and attributes (e.g.DayOfWeek, DayOfMonth) of those dates. I have managed to provide the list of dates and I know that the .net Framework gives me everything I need to extract all the attributes, I just can't figure out how to add the attribute as new columns in my list.
Here's what I have so far:
type Span = Span of TimeSpan with
static member (+) (d:DateTime, Span wrapper) = d + wrapper //this is defining the + operator
static member Zero = Span(new TimeSpan(0L))
type Dates() =
let a = DateTime.Parse("01/12/2013")
let b =DateTime.Parse("02/12/2013")
let ts = TimeSpan.FromDays(1.0)
member this.Get() = [a .. Span(ts) .. b]
let mydates = new Dates()
mydates.Get()
When I run that code I get a list of DateTime values, with 2 records in the list. I can now do something like this:
mydates.Get() |> List.map (fun x -> x.DayOfWeek);;
which returns:
val it : DayOfWeek list = [Sunday; Monday]
or
mydates.Get() |> List.map (fun x -> x.DayOfYear);;
which returns:
val it : int list = [335; 336]
That's all great, however what I would like to do is project a list that has 2 "columns" (if columns is the right word) so that my output is (something like):
val it : int list = [(Sunday,335); (Monday,336)]
I hope that explains what I'm after.
thanks
Jamie
For your example, the solution is simple, make the map return a tuple like so
mydates.Get() |> List.map (fun x -> x.DayOfWeek,x.DayOfYear);;
I have a list of tuples like so:
let scorecard = [ for i in 0 .. 39 -> i,0 ]
I want to identify the nth tuple in it. I was thinking about it in this way:
let foundTuple = scorecard |> Seq.find(fun (x,y) -> x = 10)
I then want to create a new tuple based on the found one:
let newTuple = (fst foundTuple, snd foundTuple + 1)
And have a new list with that updated value
Does anyone have some code that matches this pattern? I think I have to split the list into 2 sublists: 1 list has 1 element (the tuple I want to replace) and the other list has the remaining elements. I then create a new list with the replacing tuple and the list of unchanged tuples...
You can use List.mapi which creates a new list using a specified projection function - but it also calls the projection function with the current index and so you can decide what to do based on this index.
For example, to increment second element of a list of integers, you can do:
let oldList = [0;0;0;0]
let newList = oldList |> List.mapi (fun index v -> if index = 1 then v + 1 else v)
Depending on the problem, it might make sense to use the Map type instead of list - map represents a mapping from keys to values and does not need to copy the entire contents when you change just a single value. So, for example:
// Map keys from 0 to 3 to values 0
let m = Map.ofList [0,0;1,0;2,0;3,0]
// Set the value at index 1 to 10 and get a new map
Map.add 1 10 m
I went back and thought about the problem and decided to use an array, which is mutable.
let scorecard = [| for i in 0 .. 39 -> i,0 |]
Since tuples are not mutable, I need to create a new tuple based on the existing one and overwrite it in the array:
let targetTuple = scorecard.[3]
let newTuple = (fst targetTuple, snd targetTuple + 1)
scorecard.[3] <- newTuple
I am using the "<-" which is a code smell in F#. I wonder if there a comparable purely functional equivalent?
I'm reading Expert F# book and I found this code
open System.Collections.Generic
let divideIntoEquivalenceClasses keyf seq =
// The dictionary to hold the equivalence classes
let dict = new Dictionary<'key,ResizeArray<'T>>()
// Build the groupings
seq |> Seq.iter (fun v ->
let key = keyf v
let ok,prev = dict.TryGetValue(key)
if ok then prev.Add(v)
else let prev = new ResizeArray<'T>()
dict.[key] <- prev
prev.Add(v))
dict |> Seq.map (fun group -> group.Key, Seq.readonly group.Value)
and the example use:
> divideIntoEquivalenceClasses (fun n -> n % 3) [ 0 .. 10 ];;
val it : seq<int * seq<int>>
= seq [(0, seq [0; 3; 6; 9]); (1, seq [1; 4; 7; 10]); (2, seq [2; 5; 8])]
first for me this code is really ugly, even if this is safe, It looks more similar to imperative languages than to functional lang..specially compared to clojure. But the problem is not this...I'm having problems with the Dictionary definition
when I type this:
let dict = new Dictionary<'key,ResizeArray<'T>>();;
I get this:
pruebafs2a.fs(32,5): error FS0030: Value restriction. The value 'dict' has been inferred to have generic type
val dict : Dictionary<'_key,ResizeArray<'_T>> when '_key : equality
Either define 'dict' as a simple data term, make it a function with explicit arguments or, if you do not intend for it to be generic, add a type annotation.
is It ok?...
thanks so much
improve question:
Ok I've been reading about value restriction and I found this helpfull information
In particular, only function definitions and simple immutable data
expressions are automatically generalized
...ok..this explains why
let dict = new Dictionary<'key,ResizeArray<'T>>();;
doesn't work...and show 4 different techniques, although in my opinion they only resolve the error but aren't solutions for use generic code:
Technique 1: Constrain Values to Be Nongeneric
let empties : int list [] = Array.create 100 []
Technique 3: Add Dummy Arguments to Generic Functions When Necessary
let empties () = Array.create 100 []
let intEmpties : int list [] = empties()
Technique 4: Add Explicit Type Arguments When Necessary (similar to tec 3)
let emptyLists = Seq.init 100 (fun _ -> [])
> emptyLists<int>;;
val it : seq<int list> = seq [[]; []; []; []; ...]
----- and the only one than let me use real generic code ------
Technique 2: Ensure Generic Functions Have Explicit Arguments
let mapFirst = List.map fst //doesn't work
let mapFirst inp = List.map fst inp
Ok, in 3 of 4 techniques I need resolve the generic code before can work with this...now...returning to book example...when the compile knows the value for 'key and 'T
let dict = new Dictionary<'key,ResizeArray<'T>>()
in the scope the code is very generic for let key be any type, the same happen with 'T
and the biggest dummy question is :
when I enclose the code in a function (technique 3):
let empties = Array.create 100 [] //doesn't work
let empties () = Array.create 100 []
val empties : unit -> 'a list []
I need define the type before begin use it
let intEmpties : int list [] = empties()
for me (admittedly I'm a little dummy with static type languages) this is not real generic because it can't infer the type when I use it, I need define the type and then pass values (not define its type based in the passed values) exist other way define type without be so explicit..
thanks so much..really appreciate any help
This line
let dict = new Dictionary<'key,ResizeArray<'T>>();;
fails because when you type the ;; the compiler doesn't know what 'key and 'T are. As the error message states you need to add a type annotation, or allow the compiler to infer the type by using it later or make it a function
Examples
Type annotation change
let dict = new Dictionary<int,ResizeArray<int>>();;
Using types later
let dict = new Dictionary<'key,ResizeArray<'T>>()
dict.[1] <- 2
using a function
let dict() = new Dictionary<'key,ResizeArray<'T>>();;
This actually doesn't cause an issue when it's defined all together. That is, select the entire block that you posted and send it to FSI in one go. I get this:
val divideIntoEquivalenceClasses :
('T -> 'key) -> seq<'T> -> seq<'key * seq<'T>> when 'key : equality
However, if you type these individually into FSI then as John Palmer says there is not enough information in that isolated line for the interpreter to determine the type constraints. John's suggestions will work, but the original code is doing it correctly - defining the variable and using it in the same scope so that the types can be inferred.
for me this code is really ugly, even if this is safe, It looks more similar to imperative languages than to functional lang.
I agree completely – it's slightly tangential to your direct question, but I think a more idiomatic (functional) approach would be:
let divideIntoEquivalenceClasses keyf seq =
(System.Collections.Generic.Dictionary(), seq)
||> Seq.fold (fun dict v ->
let key = keyf v
match dict.TryGetValue key with
| false, _ -> dict.Add (key, ResizeArray(Seq.singleton v))
| _, prev -> prev.Add v
dict)
|> Seq.map (function KeyValue (k, v) -> k, Seq.readonly v)
This allows sufficient type inference to obviate the need for your question in the first place.
The workarounds proposed by the other answers are all good. Just to clarify based on your latest updates, let's consider two blocks of code:
let empties = Array.create 100 []
as opposed to:
let empties = Array.create 100 []
empties.[0] <- [1]
In the second case, the compiler can infer that empties : int list [], because we are inserting an int list into the array in the second line, which constrains the element type.
It sounds like you'd like the compiler to infer a generic value empties : 'a list [] in the first case, but this would be unsound. Consider what would happen if the compiler did that and we then entered the following two lines in another batch:
empties.[0] <- [1] // treat 'a list [] as int list []
List.iter (printfn "%s") empties.[0] // treat 'a list [] as string list []
Each of these lines unifies the generic type parameter 'a with a different concrete type (int and string). Either of these unifications is fine in isolation, but they are incompatible with each other and would result in treating the int value 1 inserted by the first line as a string when the second line is executed, which is clearly a violation of type safety.
Contrast this with an empty list, which really is generic:
let empty = []
Then in this case, the compiler does infer empty : 'a list, because it's safe to treat empty as a list of different types in different locations in your code without ever impacting type safety:
let l1 : int list = empty
let l2 : string list = empty
let l3 = 'a' :: empty
In the case where you make empties the return value of a generic function:
let empties() = Array.create 100 []
it is again safe to infer a generic type, since if we try our problematic scenario from before:
empties().[0] <- [1]
List.iter (printfn "%s") (empties().[0])
we are creating a new array on each line, so the types can be different without breaking the type system.
Hopefully this helps explain the reasons behind the limitation a bit more.