Re: [Haskell-cafe] Basic list exercise

can we do better than this?
Does the implementation in Data.List do better? https://hackage.haskell.org/package/base-4.18.0.0/docs/src/Data.OldList.html... note that 'ascending' does some trickery there - perhaps exactly to solve the problem you describe? Since this is about "exercise" - I would expect my students to find that code, so perhaps I'd point them to it right away, and give the task to "understand it" (= argue that it is correct). Arguing about cost seems harder. NB: 'descending' is different here, and that's no surprise since lists are asymmetric. We do have a symmetric (and strict) implementation of sequences - how do we sort these? https://hackage.haskell.org/package/containers-0.6.7/docs/src/Data.Sequence.... That's not exactly an advertisement for functional programming, as it has "state" written all over the place? But it makes for a nice exercise reading the types. I needed some time to understand that the mouse-over block for an identifier contains _two_ types: the instantiated one (for the use site) and, below that, the general one (from the definition). - J.W.

If I understand correcly, Data.List is building a lot of closures — basically, a CPS transform. I though about it, but I'm not sure it is better.
On 24 Mar 2023, at 18:44, Johannes Waldmann
wrote: can we do better than this?
Does the implementation in Data.List do better?
https://hackage.haskell.org/package/base-4.18.0.0/docs/src/Data.OldList.html...
note that 'ascending' does some trickery there - perhaps exactly to solve the problem you describe?
Since this is about "exercise" - I would expect my students to find that code, so perhaps I'd point them to it right away, and give the task to "understand it" (= argue that it is correct). Arguing about cost seems harder.
NB: 'descending' is different here, and that's no surprise since lists are asymmetric. We do have a symmetric (and strict) implementation of sequences - how do we sort these?
https://hackage.haskell.org/package/containers-0.6.7/docs/src/Data.Sequence....
That's not exactly an advertisement for functional programming, as it has "state" written all over the place? But it makes for a nice exercise reading the types.
I needed some time to understand that the mouse-over block for an identifier contains _two_ types: the instantiated one (for the use site) and, below that, the general one (from the definition).
- J.W. _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list To (un)subscribe, modify options or view archives go to: http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe Only members subscribed via the mailman list are allowed to post.

Yes, I think that technique is equivalent to building the list you want backwards, and then reversing it at the end. (This is because the closures are forming a structure which is essentially a linked list, and when finally applied to an argument they build the desired actual list by traversing the closures in reverse order relative to how they were allocated.) So I agree, I don’t think it’s better in terms of allocation. Jeff
On Mar 24, 2023, at 10:53 AM, MigMit
wrote: If I understand correcly, Data.List is building a lot of closures — basically, a CPS transform. I though about it, but I'm not sure it is better.
On 24 Mar 2023, at 18:44, Johannes Waldmann
wrote: can we do better than this?
Does the implementation in Data.List do better?
https://hackage.haskell.org/package/base-4.18.0.0/docs/src/Data.OldList.html...
note that 'ascending' does some trickery there - perhaps exactly to solve the problem you describe?
Since this is about "exercise" - I would expect my students to find that code, so perhaps I'd point them to it right away, and give the task to "understand it" (= argue that it is correct). Arguing about cost seems harder.
NB: 'descending' is different here, and that's no surprise since lists are asymmetric. We do have a symmetric (and strict) implementation of sequences - how do we sort these?
https://hackage.haskell.org/package/containers-0.6.7/docs/src/Data.Sequence....
That's not exactly an advertisement for functional programming, as it has "state" written all over the place? But it makes for a nice exercise reading the types.
I needed some time to understand that the mouse-over block for an identifier contains _two_ types: the instantiated one (for the use site) and, below that, the general one (from the definition).
- J.W. _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list To (un)subscribe, modify options or view archives go to: http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe Only members subscribed via the mailman list are allowed to post.
_______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list To (un)subscribe, modify options or view archives go to: http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe Only members subscribed via the mailman list are allowed to post.
participants (3)
-
Jeff Clites
-
Johannes Waldmann
-
MigMit