I'm looking for a library that will compute the fixed point / closure of a set under a number of operators of variable arity. For example,
fixwith [(+)] [1]
for the integers should compute all of N (the naturals, 1..
). I tried taking a stab at writing it, but some things are lacking. It's not very efficient, and I have a feeling that my handling of multi-arity functions is not the most elegant. Further, would it be possible to write using the builtin fix
function instead of manual recursion?
class OperatorN α β | β -> α where
wrap_op :: β -> (Int, [α] -> α)
instance OperatorN α (() -> α) where
wrap_op f = (0, \[] -> f ())
instance OperatorN α (α -> α) where
wrap_op f = (1, \[x] -> f x)
instance OperatorN α ((α, α) -> α) where
wrap_op f = (2, \[x, y] -> f (x, y))
instance OperatorN α ((α, α, α) -> α) where
wrap_op f = (3, \[x, y, z] -> f (x, y, z))
instance OperatorN α ((α, α, α, α) -> α) where
wrap_op f = (4, \[x, y, z, w] -> f (x, y, z, w))
type WrappedOp α = (Int, [α] -> α)
fixwith_next :: Eq α => [WrappedOp α] -> [α] -> [α]
fixwith_next ops s = List.nub (foldl (++) s (map g ops)) where
g (0, f) = [f []]
g (arity, f) = do
x <- s
let fx = \xs -> f (x:xs)
g (arity - 1, fx)
fixwith ops s
| next <- fixwith_next ops s
, next /= s
= fixwith ops next
fixwith _ s = s
examples,
> fixwith [wrap_op $ uncurry (*)] [-1 :: Int]
[-1,1]
> fixwith [wrap_op $ uncurry (*)] [1 :: Int]
[1]
> fixwith [wrap_op $ max 3, wrap_op $ \() -> 0] [1 :: Int]
[1,3,0]
This doesn't improve performance all that much, though I guess I just need to figure out how to do less computation to make it actually faster.
import qualified Control.RMonad as RMonad
class OperatorN α β | β -> α where
wrap_op :: β -> (Int, [α] -> α)
instance OperatorN α (() -> α) where
wrap_op f = (0, \[] -> f ())
instance OperatorN α (α -> α) where
wrap_op f = (1, \[x] -> f x)
instance OperatorN α ((α, α) -> α) where
wrap_op f = (2, \[x, y] -> f (x, y))
instance OperatorN α ((α, α, α) -> α) where
wrap_op f = (3, \[x, y, z] -> f (x, y, z))
instance OperatorN α ((α, α, α, α) -> α) where
wrap_op f = (4, \[x, y, z, w] -> f (x, y, z, w))
type WrappedOp α = (Int, [α] -> α)
fixwith_next :: Ord α => [WrappedOp α] -> Set α -> Set α
fixwith_next ops s = Set.unions $ s : map g ops where
g (0, f) = RMonad.return $ f []
g (arity, f) = s RMonad.>>= \x ->
g (arity - 1, \xs -> f (x:xs))
fixwith' ops s
| next <- fixwith_next ops s
, next /= s
= fixwith' ops next
fixwith' _ s = s
fixwith ops s = Set.toList $ fixwith' ops (Set.fromList s)
I used RMonad
to clean this up a little, and made it lazy as Daniel suggested. I think most of the time is being spent in the actual multiplication routines, sadly, so I didn't see any performance benefit from this change. The laziness is cool though.
notin :: Ord α => Set α -> Set α -> Set α
notin = flip Set.difference
class Ord α => OperatorN α β | β -> α where
next_values :: β -> Set α -> Set α
instance Ord α => OperatorN α (α -> α) where
next_values f s = notin s $ s RMonad.>>= \x -> RMonad.return (f x)
instance Ord α => OperatorN α (α -> α -> α) where
next_values f s = s RMonad.>>= \x -> next_values (f x) s
instance Ord α => OperatorN α (α -> α -> α -> α) where
next_values f s = s RMonad.>>= \x -> next_values (f x) s
instance Ord α => OperatorN α (α -> α -> α -> α -> α) where
next_values f s = s RMonad.>>= \x -> next_values (f x) s
-- bind lambdas with next_values
fixwith_next :: Ord α => [Set α -> Set α] -> Set α -> Set α
fixwith_next nv_bnd s = Set.unions $ map (\f -> f s) nv_bnd -- bound next values
fixwith' :: Ord α => [Set α -> Set α] -> Set α -> [α]
fixwith' ops s@(fixwith_next ops -> next)
| Set.size next == 0 = []
| otherwise = (Set.toList next) ++ fixwith' ops (Set.union s next)
fixwith ops s = (Set.toList s) ++ fixwith' ops s
fixwith_lst ops = fixwith ops . Set.fromList
example
> take 3 $ fixwith [next_values (+2)] (Set.fromList [1])
[1,3,5]
I had to lose unary operations, but that's not a deal killer.
Nope, fix
is a red herring. It's computing a different kind of fixed-point than you are.
Your handling of arity is very pragmatic. There are a number of different ways you could make it a bit less boiler-platey; see one of my previous answers for one such way. I'm sure someone will come on and add another mind-blowing type-level numerals-based solution eventually, as well. =)
For efficiency, I'm not sure you can do much better with only an Eq
instance anyway. You might consider filtering out s
values from the results of the calls to the (local) g
function -- that is, letting fixwith_next
return only the new elements. This ought to make the termination check faster and may even make it possible to have a productive, lazy fixwith
.
If you're alright with strictness and requiring an Ord
instance, using real Set
s will probably improve the efficiency as well.
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