Is it really true that OCaml doesn't have a function which converts from a list to a set?
If that is the case, is it possible to make a generic function list_to_set
? I've tried to make a polymorphic set without luck.
We can convert the list into a set using the set() command, where we have to insert the list name between the parentheses that are needed to be converted. Hence, in the above case, we have to type the set(the_names) in order to convert the names, present in the list into a set.
The most straightforward way to convert a set to a list is by passing the set as an argument while creating the list. This calls the constructor and from there onwards the constructor takes care of the rest. Since the set has been converted to a list, the elements are now ordered.
Python | set() method set() method is used to convert any of the iterable to sequence of iterable elements with distinct elements, commonly called Set. Syntax : set(iterable) Parameters : Any iterable sequence like list, tuple or dictionary. Returns : An empty set if no element is passed.
Using the tuple() built-in function An iterable can be passed as an input to the tuple () function, which will convert it to a tuple object. If you want to convert a Python list to a tuple, you can use the tuple() function to pass the full list as an argument, and it will return the tuple data type as an output.
Ocaml 3.12 has extensions (7,13 Explicit naming of type variables and 7,14 First-class modules) that make it possible to instantiate and pass around modules for polymorphic values.
In this example, the make_set
function returns a Set
module for a given comparison function and the build_demo
function constructs a set given a module and a list of values:
let make_set (type a) compare =
let module Ord = struct
type t = a
let compare = compare
end
in (module Set.Make (Ord) : Set.S with type elt = a)
let build_demo (type a) set_module xs =
let module S = (val set_module : Set.S with type elt = a) in
let set = List.fold_right S.add xs S.empty in
Printf.printf "%b\n" (S.cardinal set = List.length xs)
let demo (type a) xs = build_demo (make_set compare) xs
let _ = begin demo ['a', 'b', 'c']; demo [1, 2, 3]; end
This doesn't fully solve the problem, though, because the compiler doesn't allow the return value to have a type that depends on the module argument:
let list_to_set (type a) set_module xs =
let module S = (val set_module : Set.S with type elt = a) in
List.fold_right S.add xs S.empty
Error: This `let module' expression has type S.t
In this type, the locally bound module name S escapes its scope
A possible work-around is to return a collection of functions that operate on the hidden set value:
let list_to_add_mem_set (type a) set_module xs =
let module S = (val set_module : Set.S with type elt = a) in
let set = ref (List.fold_right S.add xs S.empty) in
let add x = set := S.add x !set in
let mem x = S.mem x !set in
(add, mem)
Fundamental problem: Lists can contain elements of any types. Sets (assuming you mean the Set module of the standard library), in contrary, rely on a element comparison operation to remain balanced trees. You cannot hope to convert a t list
to a set if you don't have a comparison operation on t
.
Practical problem: the Set
module of the standard library is functorized: it takes as input a module representing your element type and its comparison operation, and produces as output a module representing the set. Making this work with the simple parametric polymoprhism of lists is a bit sport.
To do this, the easiest way is to wrap your set_of_list function in a functor, so that it is itself parametrized by a comparison function.
module SetOfList (E : Set.OrderedType) = struct
module S = Set.Make(E)
let set_of_list li =
List.fold_left (fun set elem -> S.add elem set) S.empty li
end
You can then use for example with the String module, which provides a suitable compare
function.
module SoL = SetOfList(String);;
SoL.S.cardinal (SoL.set_of_list ["foo"; "bar"; "baz"]);; (* returns 3 *)
It is also possible to use different implementation of sets which are non-functorized, such as Batteries and Extlib 'PSet' implementation (documentation). The functorized design is advised because it has better typing guarantees -- you can't mix sets of the same element type using different comparison operations.
NB: of course, if you already have a given set module, instantiated form the Set.Make functor, you don't need all this; but you conversion function won't be polymorphic. For example assume I have the StringSet
module defined in my code:
module StringSet = Set.Make(String)
Then I can write stringset_of_list
easily, using StringSet.add
and StringSet.empty
:
let stringset_of_list li =
List.fold_left (fun set elem -> StringSet.add elem set) StringSet.empty li
In case you're not familiar with folds, here is a direct, non tail-recursive recursive version:
let rec stringset_of_list = function
| [] -> StringSet.empty
| hd::tl -> StringSet.add hd (stringset_of_list tl)
If you love us? You can donate to us via Paypal or buy me a coffee so we can maintain and grow! Thank you!
Donate Us With