Is there a scala replacement for Guava MultiSet and Table concepts? - scala

To use guava Table and Multiset in scala? are there already different concenpts in scala instead of importing guava library for this usage?

You could use Map[(R, C), V] instead of Table<R, C, V> and Map[T, Int] instead of Multiset<T>. You could also add helper methods to Map[T, Int] like this:
implicit class Multiset[T](val m: Map[T, Int]) extends AnyVal {
def setAdd(e: T, i: Int = 1) = {
val cnt = m.getOrElse(e, 0) + i
if (cnt <= 0) m - e
else m.updated(e, cnt)
}
def setRemove(e: T, i: Int = 1) = setAdd(e, -i)
def count(e: T) = m.getOrElse(e, 0)
}
val m = Map('a -> 5)
m setAdd 'a
// Map('a -> 6)
m setAdd 'b
// Map('a -> 5, 'b -> 1)
m setAdd ('b, 10)
// Map('a -> 5, 'b -> 10)
m setRemove 'a
// Map('a -> 4)
m setRemove ('a, 6)
// Map()
m count 'b
// 0
(m setAdd 'a) count 'a
// 6

This is a first naive implementation using Map[(R, C), V] as a delegated collection.
rowsand columns are used as indexes for the m: Map.
package utils.collections
import utils.collections.Table.Cell
class Table[R, C, V](val m: Map[(R, C), V], val rows: Map[R, List[(R, C)]], val columns: Map[C, List[(R, C)]]) {
def containsValue(value: V): Boolean = m.values.exists(_.equals(value))
def values(): List[V] = m.values.toList
def get(rowKey: R, columnKey: C): Option[V] = m.get(rowKey, columnKey)
def apply(rowKey: R, columnKey: C): V = m.apply((rowKey, columnKey))
def cellSet(): Set[Cell[R, C, V]] = m.map { case ((r, c), v) => Cell(r, c, v) }.toSet
def contains(rowKey: R, columnKey: C): Boolean = m.contains((rowKey, columnKey))
def put(rowKey: R, columnKey: C, value: V): Table[R, C, V] = {
val keys: (R, C) = (rowKey, columnKey)
new Table(
m = m + ((keys, value)),
rows = rows + ((rowKey, keys::rows.getOrElse(rowKey, List.empty))),
columns = columns + ((columnKey, keys::columns.getOrElse(columnKey, List.empty)))
)
}
def putAll(table: Table[_ <: R, _ <: C, _ <: V]): Table[R, C, V] = Table(m.++(xs = table.m))
def remove(rowKey: R, columnKey: C): Table[R, C, V] = {
val keys: (R, C) = (rowKey, columnKey)
val updatedRows: Map[R, List[(R, C)]] = rows.get(rowKey) match {
case Some(keysWithRow) if keysWithRow.diff(List(keys)).nonEmpty => rows + ((rowKey, keysWithRow.diff(List(keys))))
case _ => rows - rowKey
}
val updatedColumns: Map[C, List[(R, C)]] = columns.get(columnKey) match {
case Some(keysWithColumn) if keysWithColumn.diff(List(keys)).nonEmpty => columns + ((columnKey, keysWithColumn.diff(List(keys))))
case _ => columns - columnKey
}
new Table(
m = m - keys,
rows = updatedRows,
columns = updatedColumns
)
}
def row(rowKey: R): Map[C, V] = m.filterKeys(k => rows.get(rowKey).exists(_.equals(k))).map { case ((_, c), v) => (c, v) }
def containsRow(rowKey: R): Boolean = rows.exists(_.equals(rowKey))
def rowMap(): Map[R, Map[C, V]] = m.groupBy { case ((r, _), _) => r }.map { case (r, subMap) => (r, subMap.map { case ((_, c), v) => (c, v) }) }
def rowKeySet(): Set[R] = rows.keySet
def column(columnKey: C): Map[R, V] = m.filterKeys(k => columns.get(columnKey).exists(_.equals(k))).map { case ((r, _), v) => (r, v) }
def containsColumn(columnKey: C): Boolean = columns.exists(_.equals(columnKey))
def columnMap(): Map[C, Map[R, V]] = m.groupBy { case ((_, c), _) => c }.map { case (c, subMap) => (c, subMap.map { case ((r, _), v) => (r, v) }) }
def columnKeySet(): Set[C] = columns.keySet
def size(): Int = m.size
def isEmpty: Boolean = m.isEmpty
}
object Table {
case class Cell[R, C, V](rowKey: R, columnKey: C, value: V)
def empty[R, C, V] = new Table[R, C, V](Map.empty, Map.empty, Map.empty)
def apply[R, C, V](m: Map[(R, C), V]): Table[R, C, V] = {
val rows: Map[R, List[(R, C)]] = m.keys.groupBy { case (r, c) => r }.map { case (r, keys) => r -> keys.toList }
val columns: Map[C, List[(R, C)]] = m.keys.groupBy { case (r, c) => c }.map { case (c, keys) => c -> keys.toList }
new Table[R, C, V](m, rows, columns)
}
}

Related

How to use Numeric[T] to represent zero of any numeric type

I have a piece of Scala code that I'd like to make more generic. I know that Numeric[T] exists, but I'm not sure how to use it.
def sumMaps[A](m1: Map[A, Long], m2: Map[A, Long]): Map[A, Long] = {
m1 ++ m2.map { case (k, v) => k -> (v + m1.getOrElse(k, 0L)) }
}
def sumMaps[A](m1: Map[A, Int], m2: Map[A, Int]): Map[A, Int] = {
m1 ++ m2.map { case (k, v) => k -> (v + m1.getOrElse(k, 0)) }
}
def sumMaps[A](m1: Map[A, Double], m2: Map[A, Double]): Map[A, Double] = {
m1 ++ m2.map { case (k, v) => k -> (v + m1.getOrElse(k, 0)) }
}
I'd like to write something like this (just once), where the zero value gets auto-converted to a B type.
def sumMaps[A, B: Numeric[?]](m1: Map[A, B], m2: Map[A, B]): Map[A, B] = {
m1 ++ m2.map { case (k, v) => k -> (v + m1.getOrElse(k, 0)) }
}
Try
def sumMaps[A, B](m1: Map[A, B], m2: Map[A, B])(implicit num: Numeric[B]): Map[A, B] = {
m1 ++ m2.map { case (k, v) => k -> num.plus(v, m1.getOrElse(k, num.zero)) }
}
or
import Numeric.Implicits._
def sumMaps[A, B](m1: Map[A, B], m2: Map[A, B])(implicit num: Numeric[B]): Map[A, B] = {
m1 ++ m2.map { case (k, v) => k -> (v + m1.getOrElse(k, num.zero)) }
}
or
def sumMaps[A, B: Numeric](m1: Map[A, B], m2: Map[A, B]): Map[A, B] = {
val num = implicitly[Numeric[B]]
import num._
m1 ++ m2.map { case (k, v) => k -> (v + m1.getOrElse(k, zero)) }
}
The imports provide implicit conversion infixNumericOps
m1 ++ m2.map { case (k, v) => k -> (infixNumericOps(v) + m1.getOrElse(k, num.zero)) }
so we do not have to explicitly use Numeric.plus like in the first example.

Scala foldLeft while some conditions are true

How to emulate following behavior in Scala? i.e. keep folding while some certain conditions on the accumulator are met.
def foldLeftWhile[B](z: B, p: B => Boolean)(op: (B, A) => B): B
For example
scala> val seq = Seq(1, 2, 3, 4)
seq: Seq[Int] = List(1, 2, 3, 4)
scala> seq.foldLeftWhile(0, _ < 3) { (acc, e) => acc + e }
res0: Int = 1
scala> seq.foldLeftWhile(0, _ < 7) { (acc, e) => acc + e }
res1: Int = 6
UPDATES:
Based on #Dima answer, I realized that my intention was a little bit side-effectful. So I made it synchronized with takeWhile, i.e. there would be no advancement if the predicate does not match. And add some more examples to make it clearer. (Note: that will not work with Iterators)
First, note that your example seems wrong. If I understand correctly what you describe, the result should be 1 (the last value on which the predicate _ < 3 was satisfied), not 6
The simplest way to do this is using a return statement, which is very frowned upon in scala, but I thought, I'd mention it for the sake of completeness.
def foldLeftWhile[A, B](seq: Seq[A], z: B, p: B => Boolean)(op: (B, A) => B): B = foldLeft(z) { case (b, a) =>
val result = op(b, a)
if(!p(result)) return b
result
}
Since we want to avoid using return, scanLeft might be a possibility:
seq.toStream.scanLeft(z)(op).takeWhile(p).last
This is a little wasteful, because it accumulates all (matching) results.
You could use iterator instead of toStream to avoid that, but Iterator does not have .last for some reason, so, you'd have to scan through it an extra time explicitly:
seq.iterator.scanLeft(z)(op).takeWhile(p).foldLeft(z) { case (_, b) => b }
It is pretty straightforward to define what you want in scala. You can define an implicit class which will add your function to any TraversableOnce (that includes Seq).
implicit class FoldLeftWhile[A](trav: TraversableOnce[A]) {
def foldLeftWhile[B](init: B)(where: B => Boolean)(op: (B, A) => B): B = {
trav.foldLeft(init)((acc, next) => if (where(acc)) op(acc, next) else acc)
}
}
Seq(1,2,3,4).foldLeftWhile(0)(_ < 3)((acc, e) => acc + e)
Update, since the question was modified:
implicit class FoldLeftWhile[A](trav: TraversableOnce[A]) {
def foldLeftWhile[B](init: B)(where: B => Boolean)(op: (B, A) => B): B = {
trav.foldLeft((init, false))((a,b) => if (a._2) a else {
val r = op(a._1, b)
if (where(r)) (op(a._1, b), false) else (a._1, true)
})._1
}
}
Note that I split your (z: B, p: B => Boolean) into two higher-order functions. That's just a personal scala style preference.
What about this:
def foldLeftWhile[A, B](z: B, xs: Seq[A], p: B => Boolean)(op: (B, A) => B): B = {
def go(acc: B, l: Seq[A]): B = l match {
case h +: t =>
val nacc = op(acc, h)
if(p(nacc)) go(op(nacc, h), t) else nacc
case _ => acc
}
go(z, xs)
}
val a = Seq(1,2,3,4,5,6)
val r = foldLeftWhile(0, a, (x: Int) => x <= 3)(_ + _)
println(s"$r")
Iterate recursively on the collection while the predicate is true, and then return the accumulator.
You cand try it on scalafiddle
After a while I received a lot of good looking answers. So, I combined them to this single post
a very concise solution by #Dima
implicit class FoldLeftWhile[A](seq: Seq[A]) {
def foldLeftWhile[B](z: B)(p: B => Boolean)(op: (B, A) => B): B = {
seq.toStream.scanLeft(z)(op).takeWhile(p).lastOption.getOrElse(z)
}
}
by #ElBaulP (I modified a little bit to match comment by #Dima)
implicit class FoldLeftWhile[A](seq: Seq[A]) {
def foldLeftWhile[B](z: B)(p: B => Boolean)(op: (B, A) => B): B = {
#tailrec
def foldLeftInternal(acc: B, seq: Seq[A]): B = seq match {
case x :: _ =>
val newAcc = op(acc, x)
if (p(newAcc))
foldLeftInternal(newAcc, seq.tail)
else
acc
case _ => acc
}
foldLeftInternal(z, seq)
}
}
Answer by me (involving side effects)
implicit class FoldLeftWhile[A](seq: Seq[A]) {
def foldLeftWhile[B](z: B)(p: B => Boolean)(op: (B, A) => B): B = {
var accumulator = z
seq
.map { e =>
accumulator = op(accumulator, e)
accumulator -> e
}
.takeWhile { case (acc, _) =>
p(acc)
}
.lastOption
.map { case (acc, _) =>
acc
}
.getOrElse(z)
}
}
Fist exemple: predicate for each element
First you can use inner tail recursive function
implicit class TravExt[A](seq: TraversableOnce[A]) {
def foldLeftWhile[B](z: B, f: A => Boolean)(op: (A, B) => B): B = {
#tailrec
def rec(trav: TraversableOnce[A], z: B): B = trav match {
case head :: tail if f(head) => rec(tail, op(head, z))
case _ => z
}
rec(seq, z)
}
}
Or short version
implicit class TravExt[A](seq: TraversableOnce[A]) {
#tailrec
final def foldLeftWhile[B](z: B, f: A => Boolean)(op: (A, B) => B): B = seq match {
case head :: tail if f(head) => tail.foldLeftWhile(op(head, z), f)(op)
case _ => z
}
}
Then use it
val a = List(1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6).foldLeftWhile(0, _ < 3)(_ + _)
//a == 3
Second example: for accumulator value:
implicit class TravExt[A](seq: TraversableOnce[A]) {
def foldLeftWhile[B](z: B, f: A => Boolean)(op: (A, B) => B): B = {
#tailrec
def rec(trav: TraversableOnce[A], z: B): B = trav match {
case _ if !f(z) => z
case head :: tail => rec(tail, op(head, z))
case _ => z
}
rec(seq, z)
}
}
Or short version
implicit class TravExt[A](seq: TraversableOnce[A]) {
#tailrec
final def foldLeftWhile[B](z: B, f: A => Boolean)(op: (A, B) => B): B = seq match {
case _ if !f(z) => z
case head :: tail => tail.foldLeftWhile(op(head, z), f)(op)
case _ => z
}
}
Simply use a branch condition on the accumulator:
seq.foldLeft(0, _ < 3) { (acc, e) => if (acc < 3) acc + e else acc}
However you will run every entry of the sequence.

compiler error message when using State monad for memoization

I have a problem to make a working version of the Euler project problem 31 with the use of State trait (inspired from scalaz)
First, I have a solution with a mutable HashMap for memoization. It works but i would like to use the State monad, to understand it and to improve my skills.
I have used it with the fibonacci example, but when i attempt to apply the same technique to my case, i have a compiler error that i don't understand.
I use this implementation for State :
trait State[S, A] {
val run: S => (S, A)
def apply(s: S): (S, A) = run(s)
def eval(s: S): A = run(s)._2
def map[B](f: A => B): State[S, B] =
State { s: S =>
val (s1, a) = run(s)
(s1, f(a))
}
def flatMap[B](f: A => State[S, B]): State[S, B] =
State { s: S =>
val (s1, a) = run(s)
f(a)(s1)
}
}
object State {
def apply[S, A](f: S => (S, A)): State[S, A] = new State[S, A] {
final val run = f
}
def init[S, A](a: A) = State { s: S => (s, a) }
def update[S, A](f: S => S): State[S, Unit] = State { s: S => (f(s), ()) }
def gets[S, A](f: S => A): State[S, A] = State { s: S => (s, f(s)) }
}
my attempt to use it is here :
val coins = List(1, 2, 5, 10, 20, 50, 100, 200)
type MemoKey = (List[Int], Int)
type MemoType = Map[MemoKey, Int]
def ways(listCoins: List[Int], amount: Int): Int = {
def ways_impl(coins: List[Int], sum: Int): State[MemoType, Int] = (coins, sum) match {
case (Nil, 0) => State.init(1)
case (Nil, _) => State.init(0)
case (c :: cs, _) =>
for {
memoed <- State.gets { m: MemoType => m.get((coins, sum)) }
res <- memoed match {
case Some(way) => State.init[MemoType, Int](way)
case None =>
(for {
i <- 0 to sum / c
r <- ways_impl(cs, sum - i * c)
_ <- State.update { m: MemoType => m + ((coins, sum) -> r) }
} yield r).sum
}
} yield res
}
ways_impl(listCoins, amount) eval (Map())
I have a compiler error at this line :
r <- ways_impl(cs, sum - i * c)
The compiler said :
type mismatch; found : State[MemoType,Int] (which expands to) State[scala.collection.immutable.Map[(List[Int], Int),Int],Int] required: scala.collection.GenTraversableOnce[?]
For information, here is my first version with mutable map :
import scala.collection.mutable._
val memo = HashMap[(List[Int], Int), Int]()
val coins = List(1, 2, 5, 10, 20, 50, 100, 200)
def memoWays(coins: List[Int], sum: Int): Int = {
memo.getOrElse((coins, sum), {
val y = ways(coins, sum)
memo += ((coins, sum) -> y)
y
})
}
// brute force method with memoization
def ways(coins: List[Int], sum: Int): Int = (coins, sum) match {
case (Nil, 0) => 1
case (Nil, _) => 0
case (c :: cs, n) =>
(for {
i <- 0 to n / c
r = memoWays(cs, n - i * c)
} yield r).sum
}
println(s"result=${Mesure(ways(coins, 200))}")
What does that error mean ? Why the compiler want a GenTraversableOnce instead of State ?
What kind of thing i don't understand on State monad ?
And, if i may, I have an optional question :
Is my way to memoize with State Monad, is a good choice, or my first implementation with mutable map is better anyway ?
The problem is that your for comprehension is attempting to flatMap two unrelated types: a Range and a State. You're going to have to refactor, although off the top of my head, it's not clear to me how you'll be able to leverage State in a simple way. I'd probably use an immutable Map for the memo, a List to represent the future iterations to be tried, and simple recursion to iterate.

Generating change set between two maps

What is the best/cleanest/most-efficient way to detect changes between two Map instances. I.e.
val before = Map(1 -> "foo", 2 -> "bar", 3 -> "baz")
val after = Map(1 -> "baz", 2 -> "bar", 4 -> "boo")
// not pretty:
val removed = before.keySet diff after.keySet
val added = after.filterNot { case (key, _) => before contains key }
val changed = (before.keySet intersect after.keySet).flatMap { key =>
val a = before(key)
val b = after (key)
if (a == b) None else Some(key -> (a, b))
}
Here is an idea. It probably takes O(N * log N) with N = max(before.size, after.size):
sealed trait Change[+K, +V]
case class Removed[K ](key: K) extends Change[K, Nothing]
case class Added [K, V](key: K, value : V) extends Change[K, V]
case class Updated[K, V](key: K, before: V, after: V) extends Change[K, V]
def changes[K, V](before: Map[K, V], after: Map[K, V]): Iterable[Change[K, V]] ={
val b = Iterable.newBuilder[Change[K, V]]
before.foreach { case (k, vb) =>
after.get(k) match {
case Some(va) if vb != va => b += Updated(k, vb, va)
case None => b += Removed(k)
case _ =>
}
}
after.foreach { case (k, va) =>
if (!before.contains(k)) b += Added(k, va)
}
b.result()
}
changes(before, after).foreach(println)
// Updated(1,foo,baz)
// Removed(3)
// Added(4,boo)

How to convert a Twitter Future[Map[A, Future[C]]] to a Future[Map[A, C]]

I am trying to fix the following issue:
I have a Future[Map[A, B]]. For all B, I need to apply a method that convert B to a Future[C] and I want to give back a Future[Map[A, C]]
Here is the code I have so far:
def getClients(clientIds: Seq[Int]): Future[Map[Int, ClientData]] = {
def getClientData(clientInfo: ClientInfo): Future[ClientData] =
clientInfo match {
case ValidInfo(info) => getData(info)
case _ => throw new Exception
}
client.getClients(clientIds) map {
_.toMap map {
case (clientId: Int, clientInfo: ClientInfo) =>
getClientData(clientInfo) map {
clientData => (clientId, clientData)
}
}
}
}
This code is wrong as it returns a Iterable[Future[(Int, ClientData)]]
For info getClients is a thrift method that returns Future[Map[A, B]] where the Map is mutable, so I need to convert it to an immutable map first with toMap.
Thank you in advance for your help!
scala> def f: Future[Map[String, Future[Int]]] = ???
f: Future[Map[String,Future[Int]]]
scala> def x = for {
| m <- f
| i = m.map{ case (k, fv) => fv.map{ k -> _ } }
| l <- Future.sequence(i)
| } yield l.toMap
x: Future[Map[String,Int]]
Step by step:
Convert Future[Map[A, Future[B]]] to Future[Iterable[Future[(A, B)]]]:
scala> def x1 = f.map{ _.map{ case (k, fv) => fv.map{ k -> _ } } }
x1: Future[Iterable[Future[(String, Int)]]]
Convert Iterable[Future[(A, B)]] to Future[Iterable[(A, B)]] and flatten Future[Future[...]] using flatMap:
scala> def x2 = x1.flatMap{ Future.sequence(_) }
x2: Future[immutable.Iterable[(String, Int)]]
Convert Iterable[(A, B)] to Map[A, B]:
scala> def x = x2.map{ _.toMap }
x: Future[Map[String,Int]]
For com.twitter.util.Future you should use collect instead of sequence and toSeq before collect since it accepts Seq:
def x = for {
m <- f
i = m.map{ case (k, fv) => fv.map{ k -> _ } }
l <- Future.collect(i.toSeq)
} yield l.toMap