Assuming a typical hash function for a value x :
h(x) = ( a * x + b ) % R
I want to write a scala function say buildHashFunction that returns a new hashFunction ( using random values of a and b) every time it is executed. R can be hardcoded to be the same.
The idea is to then use the resulting hashFunction to deterministically calculate hash of a number.
The most obvious way to do this will work fine:
val r = new SecureRandom()
val R = r.nextInt()
def buildHashFunction(): Int => Int = {
val a = r.nextInt()
val b = r.nextInt()
def hashFunction(x: Int) =
( a * x + b ) % R
hashFunction
}
Related
What is the "real" difference between the following ?
val b = ( x:Double) => x * 3
var b = ( x:Double) => x * 3
Technically speaking, once a value is assigned to val , it should not be changed. However, as part of the first statement, the value of b could be changed to different values by passing different values of x.
scala> val b = ( x:Double) => x * 3
b: Double => Double = $$Lambda$1109/411756754#7a522157
scala> b(3)
res1: Double = 9.0
scala> b(4)
res2: Double = 12.0
What is actually happening here? Is it not that value of b is changing here?
b is a function that takes a Double and returns a one.
The function itself can't be changed, not the value it returns (functions are first class values).
If you try to do:
b = (x : Double) => x * 6
you'll get:
error: reassignment to val
But it's possible to change the var one:
scala> b = (x : Double) => x * 7
b: Double => Double = $$Lambda$1308/1272194712#9e46050
But note that when you change the var one, you should keep its type: A function that takes a Double and returns a Double, the same if you were to change any other type like Integer or Boolean.
In the example posted by you b is a function. You are passing different values to the function subsequently. Value of b is not changed by that.
Syntax is as follows:
I try to implement a version of the Monte Carlo algorithm in Scala but i have a little problem.
In my first loop, i have a mismatch with Unit and Int, but I didn't know how to slove this.
Thank for your help !
import scala.math._
import scala.util.Random
import scala.collection.mutable.ListBuffer
object Main extends App{
def MonteCarlo(list: ListBuffer[Int]): List[Int] = {
for (i <- list) {
var c = 0.00
val X = new Random
val Y = new Random
for (j <- 0 until i) {
val x = X.nextDouble // in [0,1]
val y = Y.nextDouble // in [0,1]
if (x * x + y * y < 1) {
c = c + 1
}
}
c = c * 4
var p = c / i
var error = abs(Pi-p)
print("Approximative value of pi : $p \tError: $error")
}
}
var liste = ListBuffer (200, 2000, 4000)
MonteCarlo(liste)
}
A guy working usually with Python.
for loop does not return anything, so that's why your method returns Unit but expects List[Int] as return type is List[Int].
Second, you have not used scala interpolation correctly. It won't print the value of error. You forgot to use 's' before the string.
Third thing, if want to return list, you first need a list where you will accumulate all values of every iteration.
So i am assuming that you are trying to return error for all iterations. So i have created an errorList, which will store all values of error. If you want to return something else you can modify your code accordingly.
def MonteCarlo(list: ListBuffer[Int]) = {
val errorList = new ListBuffer[Double]()
for (i <- list) {
var c = 0.00
val X = new Random
val Y = new Random
for (j <- 0 until i) {
val x = X.nextDouble // in [0,1]
val y = Y.nextDouble // in [0,1]
if (x * x + y * y < 1) {
c = c + 1
}
}
c = c * 4
var p = c / i
var error = abs(Pi-p)
errorList += error
println(s"Approximative value of pi : $p \tError: $error")
}
errorList
}
scala> MonteCarlo(liste)
Approximative value of pi : 3.26 Error: 0.11840734641020667
Approximative value of pi : 3.12 Error: 0.02159265358979301
Approximative value of pi : 3.142 Error: 4.073464102067881E-4
res9: scala.collection.mutable.ListBuffer[Double] = ListBuffer(0.11840734641020667, 0.02159265358979301, 4.073464102067881E-4)
I have a function below that uses variable X and variable A.
How can I return both of these variables to be able to use these values further down the program.
val a = 1000;
val x = 5;
fun test (x,a) =
if (a<1) then(
x)
else(
test(x+1,a-1)
)
You just return a pair:
fun test (x, a) = if a < 1 then (x, a) else test (x+1, a-1)
You receive it by pattern matching:
val (y, z) = test (10, 11)
I'm running this program with Scala 2.10.3:
object Test {
def main(args: Array[String]) {
def factorial(x: BigInt): BigInt =
if (x == 0) 1 else x * factorial(x - 1)
val N = 1000
val t = new Array[Long](N)
var r: BigInt = 0
for (i <- 0 until N) {
val t0 = System.nanoTime()
r = r + factorial(300)
t(i) = System.nanoTime()-t0
}
val ts = t.sortWith((x, y) => x < y)
for (i <- 0 to 10)
print(ts(i) + " ")
println("*** " + ts(N/2) + "\n" + r)
}
}
and call to a pure function factorial with constant argument is evaluated during each loop iteration (conclusion based on timing results). Shouldn't the optimizer reuse function call result after the first call?
I'm using Scala IDE for Eclipse. Are there any optimization flags for the compiler, which may produce more efficient code?
Scala is not a purely functional language, so without an effect system it cannot know that factorial is pure (for example, it doesn't "know" anything about the multiplication of big ints).
You need to add your own memoization approach here. Most simply add a val f300 = factorial(300) outside your loop.
Here is a question about memoization.
I have a graph, with each vertex connected to 6 neighbors.
While constructing the graph and making declarations of the connections, I would like to use a syntax like this:
1. val vertex1, vertex2 = new Vertex
2. val index = 3 // a number between 0 and 5
3. vertex1 + index = vertex2
The result should be that vertex2 be declared assigned as index-th neighbor of vertex1, equivalent to:
4. vertex1.neighbors(index) = vertex2
While frobbing with the implementation of Vertex.+, I came up with the following:
5. def +(idx: Int) = neighbors(idx)
which, very surprisingly indeed, did not cause line 3 to be underlined red by my IDE (IntelliJIdea, BTW).
However, compilation of line 3 offsprang the following message:
error: missing arguments for method + in class Vertex;
follow this method with `_' if you want to treat it as a partially applied function
Next, I tried with an extractor, but actually, that doesn't seem to fit the case very well.
Does anybody have any clue if what I'm trying to achieve is anywhat feasible?
Thank you
You probably can achieve what you want by using := instead of =. Take a look at this illustrating repl session:
scala> class X { def +(x:X) = x; def :=(x:X) = x }
defined class X
scala> val a = new X;
a: X = X#7d283b68
scala> val b = new X;
b: X = X#44a06d88
scala> val c = new X;
c: X = X#fb88599
scala> a + b := c
res8: X = X#fb88599
As one of the comments stated, the custom = requires two parameter, for example vertex1(i)=vertex2 is dessugared to vertext.update(i,vertex2) thus forbidding the exact syntax you proposed. On the other hand := is a regular custom operator and a:=b will dessugar to a.:=(b).
Now we still have one consideration to do. Is the precedence going to work as you intent? The answer is yes, according to the Language Specification section 6.12.3. + has higher precedence than :=, so it ends up working as (a+b):=c.
Not exactly what you want, just playing with right-associativity:
scala> class Vertex {
| val neighbors = new Array[Vertex](6)
| def :=< (n: Int) = (this, n)
| def >=: (conn: (Vertex, Int)) {
| val (that, n) = conn
| that.neighbors(n) = this
| this.neighbors((n+3)%6) = that
| }
| }
defined class Vertex
scala> val a, b, c, d = new Vertex
a: Vertex = Vertex#c42aea
b: Vertex = Vertex#dd9f68
c: Vertex = Vertex#ca0c9
d: Vertex = Vertex#10fed2c
scala> a :=<0>=: b ; a :=<1>=: c ; d :=<5>=: a
scala> a.neighbors
res25: Array[Vertex] = Array(Vertex#dd9f68, Vertex#ca0c9, Vertex#10fed2c, null, null, null)