A message class:
case class Message(username:String, content:String)
A message list:
val list = List(
Message("aaa", "111"),
Message("aaa","222"),
Message("bbb","333"),
Message("aaa", "444"),
Message("aaa", "555"))
How to group the messages by name and get the following result:
List( "aaa"-> List(Message("aaa","111"), Message("aaa","222")),
"bbb" -> List(Message("bbb","333")),
"aaa" -> List(Message("aaa","444"), Message("aaa", "555")) )
That means, if a user post several messages, then group them together, until another user posted. The order should be kept.
I can't think of an easy way to do this with the provided Seq methods, but you can write your own pretty concisely with a fold:
def contGroupBy[A, B](s: List[A])(p: A => B) = (List.empty[(B, List[A])] /: s) {
case (((k, xs) :: rest), y) if k == p(y) => (k, y :: xs) :: rest
case (acc, y) => (p(y), y :: Nil) :: acc
}.reverse.map { case (k, xs) => (k, xs.reverse) }
Now contGroupBy(list)(_.username) gives you what you want.
I tried to create such a code which works not only with Lists and can be written in operator notation. I came up with this:
object Grouper {
import collection.generic.CanBuildFrom
class GroupingCollection[A, C, CC[C]](ca: C)(implicit c2i: C => Iterable[A]) {
def groupBySep[B](f: A => B)(implicit
cbf: CanBuildFrom[C,(B, C),CC[(B,C)]],
cbfi: CanBuildFrom[C,A,C]
): CC[(B, C)] =
if (ca.isEmpty) cbf().result
else {
val iter = c2i(ca).iterator
val outer = cbf()
val inner = cbfi()
val head = iter.next()
var olda = f(head)
inner += head
for (a <- iter) {
val fa = f(a)
if (olda != fa) {
outer += olda -> inner.result
inner.clear()
}
inner += a
olda = fa
}
outer += olda -> inner.result
outer.result
}
}
implicit def GroupingCollection[A, C[A]](ca: C[A])(
implicit c2i: C[A] => Iterable[A]
): GroupingCollection[A, C[A], C] =
new GroupingCollection[A, C[A],C](ca)(c2i)
}
Can be used (with Lists, Seqs, Arrays, ...) as:
list groupBySep (_.username)
def group(lst: List[Message], out: List[(String, List[Message])] = Nil)
: List[(String, List[Message])] = lst match {
case Nil => out.reverse
case Message(u, c) :: xs =>
val (same, rest) = lst span (_.username == u)
group(rest, (u -> same) :: out)
}
Tail recursive version. Usage is simply group(list).
(List[Tuple2[String,List[Message]]]() /: list) {
case (head :: tail, msg) if msg.username == head._1 =>
(msg.username -> (msg :: head._2)) :: tail
case (xs, msg) =>
(msg.username -> List(msg)) :: xs
} map { t => t._1 -> t._2.reverse } reverse
Here's another method using pattern matching and tail recursion. Probably not as efficient as those above though due to the use of both takeWhile and dropWhile.
def groupBy(msgs: List[Message]): List[(String,List[Message])] = msgs match {
case Nil => List()
case head :: tail => (head.username ->
(head :: tail.takeWhile(m => m.username == head.username))) +:
groupBy(tail.dropWhile(m => m.username == head.username))
}
Related
I want to implement method in Scala which filters from Seq elements which are for example greater than provided value and additionally returns up to one equal element. For example:
greaterOrEqual(Seq(1,2,3,3,4), 3) shouldBe Seq(3,4)
I ended up with such method:
def greaterOrEqual(
seq: ArrayBuffer[Long],
value: Long
): ArrayBuffer[Long] = {
val greater = seq.filter(_ > value)
val equal = seq.filter(_ == value)
if (equal.isEmpty) {
greater
} else {
equal.tail ++ greater
}
}
but somehow it doesn't look nice to me :) Moreover, I'd like to have generic version of this method where I'd able to use not only Long type but custom case classes.
Do you have any suggestions?
Thanks in advance.
def foo[A : Ordering[A]](seq: Seq[A], value: A) = seq.find(_ == value).toList ++ seq.filter(implicitly[Ordering[A]].gt(_,value))
Or (different style)
def foo[A](seq: Seq[A], value: A)(implicit ord: Ordering[A]) = {
import ord._
seq.find(_ == value).toList ++ seq.filter(_ > value)
}
The code below is deprecated
scala> def foo[A <% Ordered[A]](seq: Seq[A], value: A) = seq.find(_ == value).toList ++ seq.filter(_ > value)
foo: [A](seq: Seq[A], value: A)(implicit evidence$1: A => Ordered[A])List[A]
scala> foo(Seq(1,2,3,3,4,4,5),3)
res8: List[Int] = List(3, 4, 4, 5)
Here's my take on it (preserving original order).
import scala.collection.mutable.ArrayBuffer
def greaterOrEqual[A]( seq :ArrayBuffer[A], value :A
)(implicit ord :Ordering[A]
) : ArrayBuffer[A] =
seq.foldLeft((ArrayBuffer.empty[A],true)){
case (acc, x) if ord.lt(x,value) => acc
case ((acc,bool), x) if ord.gt(x,value) => (acc :+ x, bool)
case ((acc,true), x) => (acc :+ x, false)
case (acc, _) => acc
}._1
testing:
greaterOrEqual(ArrayBuffer.from("xawbaxbt"), 'b')
//res0: ArrayBuffer[Char] = ArrayBuffer(x, w, b, x, t)
This is an excellent problem for a simple tail-recursive algorithm over lists.
def greaterOrEqual[T : Ordering](elements: List[T])(value: T): List[T] = {
import Ordering.Implicits._
#annotation.tailrec
def loop(remaining: List[T], alreadyIncludedEqual: Boolean, acc: List[T]): List[T] =
remaining match {
case x :: xs =>
if (!alreadyIncludedEqual && x == value)
loop(remaining = xs, alreadyIncludedEqual = true, x :: acc)
else if (x > value)
loop(remaining = xs, alreadyIncludedEqual, x :: acc)
else
loop(remaining = xs, alreadyIncludedEqual, acc)
case Nil =>
acc.reverse
}
loop(remaining = elements, alreadyIncludedEqual = false, acc = List.empty)
}
Which you can use like this:
greaterOrEqual(List(1, 3, 2, 3, 4, 0))(3)
// val res: List[Int] = List(3, 4)
You can use the below snippet:
val list = Seq(1,2,3,3,4)
val value = 3
list.partition(_>=3)._1.toSet.toSeq
Here partition method divide the list into two list. First list which satisfy the given condition, and second list contains the remaining elements.
For generic method you can using implicit Ordering. Any type who can compare elements can be handled by greaterOrEqual method.
import scala.math.Ordering._
def greaterOrEqual[T](seq: Seq[T], value: T)(implicit ordering: Ordering[T]): Seq[T] = {
#scala.annotation.tailrec
def go(xs: List[T], value: T, acc: List[T]): List[T] = {
xs match {
case Nil => acc
case head :: rest if ordering.compare(head, value) == 0 => rest.foldLeft(head :: acc){
case (result, x) if ordering.compare(x, value) > 0 => x :: result
case (result, _) => result
}
case head :: rest if ordering.compare(head, value) > 0 => go(rest, value, head :: acc)
case _ :: rest => go(rest, value, acc)
}
}
go(seq.toList, value, List.empty[T]).reverse
}
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.
I'm teaching myself scala and trying to fatten my FP skills.
One of my references, Essentials of Programming Languages (available here), has a handy list of easy recursive functions. On page page 27/50, we are asked to implement swapper() function.
(swapper s1 s2 slist) returns a list the same as slist, but
with all occurrences of s1 replaced by s2 and all occurrences of s2 replaced by s1.
> (swapper ’a ’d ’(a b c d))
(d b c a)
> (swapper ’a ’d ’(a d () c d))
(d a () c a)
> (swapper ’x ’y ’((x) y (z (x))))
((y) x (z (y)))
In scala, this is:
swapper("a", "d", List("a","b","c","d"))
swapper("a", "d", List("a","d",List(),"c","d"))
swapper("x", "y", List( List("x"), "y", List("z", List("x"))))
My scala version handles all versions save the final x.
def swapper(a: Any, b: Any, lst: List[Any]): List[Any] ={
def r(subList :List[Any], acc : List[Any]): List[Any] ={
def swap (x :Any, xs: List[Any]) =
if(x == a){
r(xs, acc :+ b)
} else if (x == b) {
r(xs, acc :+ a)
} else {
r(xs, acc :+ x)
}
subList match {
case Nil =>
acc
case List(x) :: xs =>
r(xs, r(List(x), List()) +: acc)
case x :: xs =>
swap(x,xs)
//case List(x) :: xs =>
}
}
r(lst, List())
}
Instinctively, I think this is because I have no swap on the section "case List(x) :: xs" but I'm still struggling to fix it.
More difficult, still, this case breaks the tail-call optimization. How can I do this and where can I go to learn more about the general solution?
You can use this foldRight with pattern match approach:
def swapper(a:Any, b:Any, list:List[Any]):List[Any] =
list.foldRight(List.empty[Any]) {
case (item, acc) if item==a => b::acc
case (item, acc) if item==b => a::acc
case (item:List[Any], acc) => swapper(a, b, item)::acc
case (item, acc) => item::acc
}
or even simplier (thanks to #marcospereira):
def swapper(a:Any, b:Any, list:List[Any]):List[Any] =
list.map {
case item if item==a => b
case item if item==b => a
case item:List[Any] => swapper(a, b, item)
case item => item
}
A simpler way to solve this is just use map:
def swapper[T](a: T, b: T, list: List[T]): List[T] = list.map { item =>
if (item == a) b
else if (item == b) a
else item
}
This seems to work.
def swapper[T](a: T, b: T, lst: List[_]): List[_] = {
val m = Map[T, T](a -> b, b -> a).withDefault(identity)
def swap(arg: List[_]): List[_] = arg.map{
case l: List[_] => swap(l)
case x: T => m(x)
}
swap(lst)
}
The List elements are inconsistent because it might be an element or it might be another List, so the type is List[Any], which is a sure sigh that someone needs to rethink this data representation.
How can I change list of Eithers into two list of value Right and Left. When I use partition it returns two lists of Either's not values. What is the simplest way to do it?
foldLeft allows you to easily write your own method:
def separateEithers[T, U](list: List[Either[T, U]]) = {
val (ls, rs) = list.foldLeft(List[T](), List[U]()) {
case ((ls, rs), Left(x)) => (x :: ls, rs)
case ((ls, rs), Right(x)) => (ls, x :: rs)
}
(ls.reverse, rs.reverse)
}
You'll have to map the two resulting lists after partitioning.
val origin: List[Either[A, B]] = ???
val (lefts, rights) = origin.partition(_.isInstanceOf[Left[_]])
val leftValues = lefts.map(_.asInstanceOf[Left[A]].a)
val rightValues = rights.map(_.asInstanceOf[Right[B]].b)
If you are not happy with the casts and isInstanceOf's, you can also do it in two passes:
val leftValues = origin collect {
case Left(a) => a
}
val rightValues = origin collect {
case Right(b) => b
}
And if you are not happy with the two passes, you'll have to do it "by hand":
def myPartition[A, B](origin: List[Either[A, B]]): (List[A], List[B]) = {
val leftBuilder = List.newBuilder[A]
val rightBuilder = List.newBuilder[B]
origin foreach {
case Left(a) => leftBuilder += a
case Right(b) => rightBuilder += b
}
(leftBuilder.result(), rightBuilder.result())
}
Finally, if you don't like mutable state, you can do so:
def myPartition[A, B](origin: List[Either[A, B]]): (List[A], List[B]) = {
#tailrec
def loop(xs: List[Either[A, B]], accLeft: List[A],
accRight: List[B]): (List[A], List[B]) = {
xs match {
case Nil => (accLeft.reverse, accRight.reverse)
case Left(a) :: xr => loop(xr, a :: accLeft, accRight)
case Right(b) :: xr => loop(xr, accLeft, b :: accRight)
}
}
loop(origin, Nil, Nil)
}
If making two passes through the list is okay for you, you can use collect:
type E = Either[String, Int]
val xs: List[E] = List(Left("foo"), Right(1), Left("bar"), Right(2))
val rights = xs.collect { case Right(x) => x}
// rights: List[Int] = List(1, 2)
val lefts = xs.collect { case Left(x) => x}
// lefts: List[String] = List(foo, bar)
Using for comprehensions, like this,
for ( Left(v) <- xs ) yield v
and
for ( Right(v) <- xs ) yield v
For example, I have Seq(1,2,3) and I want to get Seq(1,0,2,0,3)
The first thing that comes to mind is:
scala> Seq(1,2,3).flatMap(e => 0 :: e :: Nil).tail
res17: Seq[Int] = List(1, 0, 2, 0, 3)
Is there any better/more elegant option?
Here is another approach:
def intersperse[E](x: E, xs:Seq[E]): Seq[E] = (x, xs) match {
case (_, Nil) => Nil
case (_, Seq(x)) => Seq(x)
case (sep, y::ys) => y+:sep+:intersperse(sep, ys)
}
which is safe over empty Seqs too.
Try for comprehension:
for(i <- list; p <- List(0, i)) yield p
However you must somehow remove the first element (it yields: 0,1,0,2,0,3), either by:
(for(i <- list; p <- List(0, i)) yield p).tail
or:
list.head :: (for(i <- list.tail; p <- List(0, i)) yield p)
def intersperse[T](xs: List[T], item: T): List[T] = xs match {
case Nil => xs
case _ :: Nil => xs
case a :: ys => a :: item :: intersperse(ys, item)
}
Can also use this extension:
implicit class SeqExtensions[A](val as: Seq[A]) extends AnyVal {
def intersperse(a: A): Seq[A] = {
val b = Seq.newBuilder[A]
val it = as.iterator
if (it.hasNext) {
b += it.next()
while(it.hasNext) {
b += a
b += it.next()
}
}
b.result()
}
}