Search Results

Search found 156 results on 7 pages for 'idiomatic'.

Page 7/7 | < Previous Page | 3 4 5 6 7 

  • F#: Advantages of converting top-level functions to member methods?

    - by J Cooper
    Earlier I requested some feedback on my first F# project. Before closing the question because the scope was too large, someone was kind enough to look it over and leave some feedback. One of the things they mentioned was pointing out that I had a number of regular functions that could be converted to be methods on my datatypes. Dutifully I went through changing things like let getDecisions hand = let (/=/) card1 card2 = matchValue card1 = matchValue card2 let canSplit() = let isPair() = match hand.Cards with | card1 :: card2 :: [] when card1 /=/ card2 -> true | _ -> false not (hasState Splitting hand) && isPair() let decisions = [Hit; Stand] let split = if canSplit() then [Split] else [] let doubleDown = if hasState Initial hand then [DoubleDown] else [] decisions @ split @ doubleDown to this: type Hand // ...stuff... member hand.GetDecisions = let (/=/) (c1 : Card) (c2 : Card) = c1.MatchValue = c2.MatchValue let canSplit() = let isPair() = match hand.Cards with | card1 :: card2 :: [] when card1 /=/ card2 -> true | _ -> false not (hand.HasState Splitting) && isPair() let decisions = [Hit; Stand] let split = if canSplit() then [Split] else [] let doubleDown = if hand.HasState Initial then [DoubleDown] else [] decisions @ split @ doubleDown Now, I don't doubt I'm an idiot, but other than (I'm guessing) making C# interop easier, what did that gain me? Specifically, I found a couple *dis*advantages, not counting the extra work of conversion (which I won't count, since I could have done it this way in the first place, I suppose, although that would have made using F# Interactive more of a pain). For one thing, I'm now no longer able to work with function "pipelining" easily. I had to go and change some |> chained |> calls to (some |> chained).Calls etc. Also, it seemed to make my type system dumber--whereas with my original version, my program needed no type annotations, after converting largely to member methods, I got a bunch of errors about lookups being indeterminate at that point, and I had to go and add type annotations (an example of this is in the (/=/) above). I hope I haven't come off too dubious, as I appreciate the advice I received, and writing idiomatic code is important to me. I'm just curious why the idiom is the way it is :) Thanks!

    Read the article

  • F# Equivalent to Enumerable.OfType<'a>

    - by Joel Mueller
    ...or, how do I filter a sequence of classes by the interfaces they implement? Let's say I have a sequence of objects that inherit from Foo, a seq<#Foo>. In other words, my sequence will contain one or more of four different subclasses of Foo. Each subclass implements a different independent interface that shares nothing with the interfaces implemented by the other subclasses. Now I need to filter this sequence down to only the items that implement a particular interface. The C# version is simple: void MergeFoosIntoList<T>(IEnumerable<Foo> allFoos, IList<T> dest) where T : class { foreach (var foo in allFoos) { var castFoo = foo as T; if (castFoo != null) { dest.Add(castFoo); } } } I could use LINQ from F#: let mergeFoosIntoList (foos:seq<#Foo>) (dest:IList<'a>) = System.Linq.Enumerable.OfType<'a>(foos) |> Seq.iter dest.Add However, I feel like there should be a more idiomatic way to accomplish it. I thought this would work... let mergeFoosIntoList (foos:seq<#Foo>) (dest:IList<'a>) = foos |> Seq.choose (function | :? 'a as x -> Some(x) | _ -> None) |> Seq.iter dest.Add However, the complier complains about :? 'a - telling me: This runtime coercion or type test from type 'b to 'a involves an indeterminate type based on information prior to this program point. Runtime type tests are not allowed on some types. Further type annotations are needed. I can't figure out what further type annotations to add. There's no relationship between the interface 'a and #Foo except that one or more subclasses of Foo implement that interface. Also, there's no relationship between the different interfaces that can be passed in as 'a except that they are all implemented by subclasses of Foo. I eagerly anticipate smacking myself in the head as soon as one of you kind people points out the obvious thing I've been missing.

    Read the article

  • Go - Using a container/heap to implement a priority queue

    - by Seth Hoenig
    In the big picture, I'm trying to implement Dijkstra's algorithm using a priority queue. According to members of golang-nuts, the idiomatic way to do this in Go is to use the heap interface with a custom underlying data structure. So I have created Node.go and PQueue.go like so: //Node.go package pqueue type Node struct { row int col int myVal int sumVal int } func (n *Node) Init(r, c, mv, sv int) { n.row = r n.col = c n.myVal = mv n.sumVal = sv } func (n *Node) Equals(o *Node) bool { return n.row == o.row && n.col == o.col } And PQueue.go: // PQueue.go package pqueue import "container/vector" import "container/heap" type PQueue struct { data vector.Vector size int } func (pq *PQueue) Init() { heap.Init(pq) } func (pq *PQueue) IsEmpty() bool { return pq.size == 0 } func (pq *PQueue) Push(i interface{}) { heap.Push(pq, i) pq.size++ } func (pq *PQueue) Pop() interface{} { pq.size-- return heap.Pop(pq) } func (pq *PQueue) Len() int { return pq.size } func (pq *PQueue) Less(i, j int) bool { I := pq.data.At(i).(Node) J := pq.data.At(j).(Node) return (I.sumVal + I.myVal) < (J.sumVal + J.myVal) } func (pq *PQueue) Swap(i, j int) { temp := pq.data.At(i).(Node) pq.data.Set(i, pq.data.At(j).(Node)) pq.data.Set(j, temp) } And main.go: (the action is in SolveMatrix) // Euler 81 package main import "fmt" import "io/ioutil" import "strings" import "strconv" import "./pqueue" const MATSIZE = 5 const MATNAME = "matrix_small.txt" func main() { var matrix [MATSIZE][MATSIZE]int contents, err := ioutil.ReadFile(MATNAME) if err != nil { panic("FILE IO ERROR!") } inFileStr := string(contents) byrows := strings.Split(inFileStr, "\n", -1) for row := 0; row < MATSIZE; row++ { byrows[row] = (byrows[row])[0 : len(byrows[row])-1] bycols := strings.Split(byrows[row], ",", -1) for col := 0; col < MATSIZE; col++ { matrix[row][col], _ = strconv.Atoi(bycols[col]) } } PrintMatrix(matrix) sum, len := SolveMatrix(matrix) fmt.Printf("len: %d, sum: %d\n", len, sum) } func PrintMatrix(mat [MATSIZE][MATSIZE]int) { for r := 0; r < MATSIZE; r++ { for c := 0; c < MATSIZE; c++ { fmt.Printf("%d ", mat[r][c]) } fmt.Print("\n") } } func SolveMatrix(mat [MATSIZE][MATSIZE]int) (int, int) { var PQ pqueue.PQueue var firstNode pqueue.Node var endNode pqueue.Node msm1 := MATSIZE - 1 firstNode.Init(0, 0, mat[0][0], 0) endNode.Init(msm1, msm1, mat[msm1][msm1], 0) if PQ.IsEmpty() { // make compiler stfu about unused variable fmt.Print("empty") } PQ.Push(firstNode) // problem return 0, 0 } The problem is, upon compiling i get the error message: [~/Code/Euler/81] $ make 6g -o pqueue.6 Node.go PQueue.go 6g main.go main.go:58: implicit assignment of unexported field 'row' of pqueue.Node in function argument make: *** [all] Error 1 And commenting out the line PQ.Push(firstNode) does satisfy the compiler. But I don't understand why I'm getting the error message in the first place. Push doesn't modify the argument in any way.

    Read the article

  • Distinguishing between failure and end of file in read loop

    - by celtschk
    The idiomatic loop to read from an istream is while (thestream >> value) { // do something with value } Now this loop has one problem: It will not distinguish if the loop terminated due to end of file, or due to an error. For example, take the following test program: #include <iostream> #include <sstream> void readbools(std::istream& is) { bool b; while (is >> b) { std::cout << (b ? "T" : "F"); } std::cout << " - " << is.good() << is.eof() << is.fail() << is.bad() << "\n"; } void testread(std::string s) { std::istringstream is(s); is >> std::boolalpha; readbools(is); } int main() { testread("true false"); testread("true false tr"); } The first call to testread contains two valid bools, and therefore is not an error. The second call ends with a third, incomplete bool, and therefore is an error. Nevertheless, the behaviour of both is the same. In the first case, reading the boolean value fails because there is none, while in the second case it fails because it is incomplete, and in both cases EOF is hit. Indeed, the program above outputs twice the same line: TF - 0110 TF - 0110 To solve this problem, I thought of the following solution: while (thestream >> std::ws && !thestream.eof() && thestream >> value) { // do something with value } The idea is to detect regular EOF before actually trying to extract the value. Because there might be whitespace at the end of the file (which would not be an error, but cause read of the last item to not hit EOF), I first discard any whitespace (which cannot fail) and then test for EOF. Only if I'm not at the end of file, I try to read the value. For my example program, it indeed seems to work, and I get TF - 0100 TF - 0110 So in the first case (correct input), fail() returns false. Now my question: Is this solution guaranteed to work, or was I just (un-)lucky that it happened to give the desired result? Also: Is there a simpler (or, if my solution is wrong, a correct) way to get the desired result?

    Read the article

  • What's the best name for a non-mutating "add" method on an immutable collection?

    - by Jon Skeet
    Sorry for the waffly title - if I could come up with a concise title, I wouldn't have to ask the question. Suppose I have an immutable list type. It has an operation Foo(x) which returns a new immutable list with the specified argument as an extra element at the end. So to build up a list of strings with values "Hello", "immutable", "world" you could write: var empty = new ImmutableList<string>(); var list1 = empty.Foo("Hello"); var list2 = list1.Foo("immutable"); var list3 = list2.Foo("word"); (This is C# code, and I'm most interested in a C# suggestion if you feel the language is important. It's not fundamentally a language question, but the idioms of the language may be important.) The important thing is that the existing lists are not altered by Foo - so empty.Count would still return 0. Another (more idiomatic) way of getting to the end result would be: var list = new ImmutableList<string>().Foo("Hello"); .Foo("immutable"); .Foo("word"); My question is: what's the best name for Foo? EDIT 3: As I reveal later on, the name of the type might not actually be ImmutableList<T>, which makes the position clear. Imagine instead that it's TestSuite and that it's immutable because the whole of the framework it's a part of is immutable... (End of edit 3) Options I've come up with so far: Add: common in .NET, but implies mutation of the original list Cons: I believe this is the normal name in functional languages, but meaningless to those without experience in such languages Plus: my favourite so far, it doesn't imply mutation to me. Apparently this is also used in Haskell but with slightly different expectations (a Haskell programmer might expect it to add two lists together rather than adding a single value to the other list). With: consistent with some other immutable conventions, but doesn't have quite the same "additionness" to it IMO. And: not very descriptive. Operator overload for + : I really don't like this much; I generally think operators should only be applied to lower level types. I'm willing to be persuaded though! The criteria I'm using for choosing are: Gives the correct impression of the result of the method call (i.e. that it's the original list with an extra element) Makes it as clear as possible that it doesn't mutate the existing list Sounds reasonable when chained together as in the second example above Please ask for more details if I'm not making myself clear enough... EDIT 1: Here's my reasoning for preferring Plus to Add. Consider these two lines of code: list.Add(foo); list.Plus(foo); In my view (and this is a personal thing) the latter is clearly buggy - it's like writing "x + 5;" as a statement on its own. The first line looks like it's okay, until you remember that it's immutable. In fact, the way that the plus operator on its own doesn't mutate its operands is another reason why Plus is my favourite. Without the slight ickiness of operator overloading, it still gives the same connotations, which include (for me) not mutating the operands (or method target in this case). EDIT 2: Reasons for not liking Add. Various answers are effectively: "Go with Add. That's what DateTime does, and String has Replace methods etc which don't make the immutability obvious." I agree - there's precedence here. However, I've seen plenty of people call DateTime.Add or String.Replace and expect mutation. There are loads of newsgroup questions (and probably SO ones if I dig around) which are answered by "You're ignoring the return value of String.Replace; strings are immutable, a new string gets returned." Now, I should reveal a subtlety to the question - the type might not actually be an immutable list, but a different immutable type. In particular, I'm working on a benchmarking framework where you add tests to a suite, and that creates a new suite. It might be obvious that: var list = new ImmutableList<string>(); list.Add("foo"); isn't going to accomplish anything, but it becomes a lot murkier when you change it to: var suite = new TestSuite<string, int>(); suite.Add(x => x.Length); That looks like it should be okay. Whereas this, to me, makes the mistake clearer: var suite = new TestSuite<string, int>(); suite.Plus(x => x.Length); That's just begging to be: var suite = new TestSuite<string, int>().Plus(x => x.Length); Ideally, I would like my users not to have to be told that the test suite is immutable. I want them to fall into the pit of success. This may not be possible, but I'd like to try. I apologise for over-simplifying the original question by talking only about an immutable list type. Not all collections are quite as self-descriptive as ImmutableList<T> :)

    Read the article

  • Python - Converting CSV to Objects - Code Design

    - by victorhooi
    Hi, I have a small script we're using to read in a CSV file containing employees, and perform some basic manipulations on that data. We read in the data (import_gd_dump), and create an Employees object, containing a list of Employee objects (maybe I should think of a better naming convention...lol). We then call clean_all_phone_numbers() on Employees, which calls clean_phone_number() on each Employee, as well as lookup_all_supervisors(), on Employees. import csv import re import sys #class CSVLoader: # """Virtual class to assist with loading in CSV files.""" # def import_gd_dump(self, input_file='Gp Directory 20100331 original.csv'): # gd_extract = csv.DictReader(open(input_file), dialect='excel') # employees = [] # for row in gd_extract: # curr_employee = Employee(row) # employees.append(curr_employee) # return employees # #self.employees = {row['dbdirid']:row for row in gd_extract} # Previously, this was inside a (virtual) class called "CSVLoader". # However, according to here (http://tomayko.com/writings/the-static-method-thing) - the idiomatic way of doing this in Python is not with a class-fucntion but with a module-level function def import_gd_dump(input_file='Gp Directory 20100331 original.csv'): """Return a list ('employee') of dict objects, taken from a Group Directory CSV file.""" gd_extract = csv.DictReader(open(input_file), dialect='excel') employees = [] for row in gd_extract: employees.append(row) return employees def write_gd_formatted(employees_dict, output_file="gd_formatted.csv"): """Read in an Employees() object, and write out each Employee() inside this to a CSV file""" gd_output_fieldnames = ('hrid', 'mail', 'givenName', 'sn', 'dbcostcenter', 'dbdirid', 'hrreportsto', 'PHFull', 'PHFull_message', 'SupervisorEmail', 'SupervisorFirstName', 'SupervisorSurname') try: gd_formatted = csv.DictWriter(open(output_file, 'w', newline=''), fieldnames=gd_output_fieldnames, extrasaction='ignore', dialect='excel') except IOError: print('Unable to open file, IO error (Is it locked?)') sys.exit(1) headers = {n:n for n in gd_output_fieldnames} gd_formatted.writerow(headers) for employee in employees_dict.employee_list: # We're using the employee object's inbuilt __dict__ attribute - hmm, is this good practice? gd_formatted.writerow(employee.__dict__) class Employee: """An Employee in the system, with employee attributes (name, email, cost-centre etc.)""" def __init__(self, employee_attributes): """We use the Employee constructor to convert a dictionary into instance attributes.""" for k, v in employee_attributes.items(): setattr(self, k, v) def clean_phone_number(self): """Perform some rudimentary checks and corrections, to make sure numbers are in the right format. Numbers should be in the form 0XYYYYYYYY, where X is the area code, and Y is the local number.""" if self.telephoneNumber is None or self.telephoneNumber == '': return '', 'Missing phone number.' else: standard_format = re.compile(r'^\+(?P<intl_prefix>\d{2})\((?P<area_code>\d)\)(?P<local_first_half>\d{4})-(?P<local_second_half>\d{4})') extra_zero = re.compile(r'^\+(?P<intl_prefix>\d{2})\(0(?P<area_code>\d)\)(?P<local_first_half>\d{4})-(?P<local_second_half>\d{4})') missing_hyphen = re.compile(r'^\+(?P<intl_prefix>\d{2})\(0(?P<area_code>\d)\)(?P<local_first_half>\d{4})(?P<local_second_half>\d{4})') if standard_format.search(self.telephoneNumber): result = standard_format.search(self.telephoneNumber) return '0' + result.group('area_code') + result.group('local_first_half') + result.group('local_second_half'), '' elif extra_zero.search(self.telephoneNumber): result = extra_zero.search(self.telephoneNumber) return '0' + result.group('area_code') + result.group('local_first_half') + result.group('local_second_half'), 'Extra zero in area code - ask user to remediate. ' elif missing_hyphen.search(self.telephoneNumber): result = missing_hyphen.search(self.telephoneNumber) return '0' + result.group('area_code') + result.group('local_first_half') + result.group('local_second_half'), 'Missing hyphen in local component - ask user to remediate. ' else: return '', "Number didn't match recognised format. Original text is: " + self.telephoneNumber class Employees: def __init__(self, import_list): self.employee_list = [] for employee in import_list: self.employee_list.append(Employee(employee)) def clean_all_phone_numbers(self): for employee in self.employee_list: #Should we just set this directly in Employee.clean_phone_number() instead? employee.PHFull, employee.PHFull_message = employee.clean_phone_number() # Hmm, the search is O(n^2) - there's probably a better way of doing this search? def lookup_all_supervisors(self): for employee in self.employee_list: if employee.hrreportsto is not None and employee.hrreportsto != '': for supervisor in self.employee_list: if supervisor.hrid == employee.hrreportsto: (employee.SupervisorEmail, employee.SupervisorFirstName, employee.SupervisorSurname) = supervisor.mail, supervisor.givenName, supervisor.sn break else: (employee.SupervisorEmail, employee.SupervisorFirstName, employee.SupervisorSurname) = ('Supervisor not found.', 'Supervisor not found.', 'Supervisor not found.') else: (employee.SupervisorEmail, employee.SupervisorFirstName, employee.SupervisorSurname) = ('Supervisor not set.', 'Supervisor not set.', 'Supervisor not set.') #Is thre a more pythonic way of doing this? def print_employees(self): for employee in self.employee_list: print(employee.__dict__) if __name__ == '__main__': db_employees = Employees(import_gd_dump()) db_employees.clean_all_phone_numbers() db_employees.lookup_all_supervisors() #db_employees.print_employees() write_gd_formatted(db_employees) Firstly, my preamble question is, can you see anything inherently wrong with the above, from either a class design or Python point-of-view? Is the logic/design sound? Anyhow, to the specifics: The Employees object has a method, clean_all_phone_numbers(), which calls clean_phone_number() on each Employee object inside it. Is this bad design? If so, why? Also, is the way I'm calling lookup_all_supervisors() bad? Originally, I wrapped the clean_phone_number() and lookup_supervisor() method in a single function, with a single for-loop inside it. clean_phone_number is O(n), I believe, lookup_supervisor is O(n^2) - is it ok splitting it into two loops like this? In clean_all_phone_numbers(), I'm looping on the Employee objects, and settings their values using return/assignment - should I be setting this inside clean_phone_number() itself? There's also a few things that I'm sorted of hacked out, not sure if they're bad practice - e.g. print_employee() and gd_formatted() both use __dict__, and the constructor for Employee uses setattr() to convert a dictionary into instance attributes. I'd value any thoughts at all. If you think the questions are too broad, let me know and I can repost as several split up (I just didn't want to pollute the boards with multiple similar questions, and the three questions are more or less fairly tightly related). Cheers, Victor

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 3 4 5 6 7