Safe Haskell | Safe-Inferred |
---|---|
Language | Haskell2010 |
This file contains a few examples of using the rec-def
library. There is no
need to actually use this module.
A rec-def
tutorial
Imagine you are trying to calculate a boolean value, but your calculation is happens to be recursive. Just writing down the equations does not work:
>>>
withTimeout $ let x = y || False; y = x && False in x
*** Exception: timed out
This is unfortunate, isn’t it?
A Bool
with recursive equations
This library provides data types where this works. You can write the equations in that way just fine, and still get a result.
For example, the R Bool
type comes with functions that look quite like their
ordinary counterparts acting on Bool
.
>>>
:t rTrue
rTrue :: R Bool>>>
:t rFalse
rFalse :: R Bool>>>
:t (|||)
(|||) :: R Bool -> R Bool -> R Bool>>>
:t (&&&)
(&&&) :: R Bool -> R Bool -> R Bool>>>
getR rTrue
True>>>
getR rFalse
False>>>
getR (rFalse &&& rTrue)
False>>>
getR (rTrue &&& rTrue)
True>>>
getR (ror [rTrue, rFalse, rTrue])
True
So far so good, lets see what happens when we try something recursive:
>>>
let x = ror [y]; y = rand [x, rFalse] in getR x
False>>>
let x = ror [y]; y = ror [x, rFalse] in getR x
False>>>
let x = ror [y]; y = ror [x, rTrue] in getR x
True>>>
let x = ror [y]; y = ror [x] in getR x
False
Least or greatest solution
The last equation is interesting: We essentially say that x
is True
if y
is
True
, and y
is True
if x
is True
. This has two solutions, we can either set
both to True
and both to False
.
We (arbitrary) choose to find the least solution, i.e. prefer False
and
only find True
if we have to. This is useful, for example, if you check something recursive for errors.
Sometimes you want the other one. Then you can use R (Dual Bool)
. The module
Data.Recursive.DualBool exports all the functions for that type too. Because
of the name class we have imported it qualified here. We can run run the same
quations, and get different answers:
>>>
let x = DB.ror [y]; y = DB.rand [x, DB.rFalse] in getRDual x
False>>>
let x = DB.ror [y]; y = DB.ror [x, DB.rFalse] in getRDual x
True>>>
let x = DB.ror [y]; y = DB.ror [x, DB.rTrue] in getRDual x
True>>>
let x = DB.ror [y]; y = DB.ror [x] in getRDual x
True
The negation function is also available, and goes from can-be-true to must-be-true and back:
>>>
:t rnot
rnot :: R (Dual Bool) -> R Bool>>>
:t DB.rnot
DB.rnot :: R Bool -> R (Dual Bool)
This allows us to mix the different types in the same computation:
>>>
:{
let x = rnot y ||| rnot z y = DB.rnot x DB.&&& z z = DB.rTrue in (getR x, getRDual y, getRDual z) :} (False,True,True)
>>>
:{
let x = rnot y ||| rnot z y = DB.rnot x DB.&&& z z = DB.rFalse in (getR x, getRDual y, getRDual z) :} (True,False,False)
Sets
We do not have to stop with booleans, and can define similar APIs for other data stuctures, e.g. sets:
Again we can describe sets recursively, using the monotone functions rEmpty
,
rInsert
and rUnion
>>>
:{
let s1 = rInsert 23 s2 s2 = rInsert 42 s1 in getR s1 :} fromList [23,42]
Here is a slightly larger example, where we can can use this API to elegantly
calculate the reachable nodes in a graph (represented as a map from vertices to
their successors), using a typical knot-tying approach. But unless with plain
Set
, it now works even if the graph has cycles:
>>>
:{
reachable :: M.Map Int [Int] -> M.Map Int (S.Set Int) reachable g = fmap getR sets where sets :: M.Map Int (R (S.Set Int)) sets = M.mapWithKey (\v vs -> rInsert v (rUnions [ sets ! v' | v' <- vs ])) g :}
>>>
let graph = M.fromList [(1,[2,3]),(2,[1]),(3,[])]
>>>
reachable graph M.! 1
fromList [1,2,3]>>>
reachable graph M.! 3
fromList [3]
Caveats
Of course, the magic stops somewhere: Just like with the usual knot-tying
tricks, you still have to make sure to be lazy enough. In particular, you should
not peek at the value (e.g. using getR
) while you are building the graph:
>>>
:{
withTimeout $ let x = rand [x, if getR y then z else rTrue] y = rand [x, rTrue] z = rFalse in getR y :} *** Exception: timed out
Similarly, you have to make sure you recurse through one of these functions; let x = x
still does not work:
>>>
withTimeout $ let x = x :: R Bool in getR x
*** Exception: timed out>>>
withTimeout $ let x = x &&& x in getR x
False
We belive that the APIs provided here are still “pure”: evaluation order does not affect the results, and you can replace equals with equals, in the sense that
let s = rInsert 42 s in s
is the same as
let s = rInsert 42 s in rInsert 42 s
However, the the following two expressions are not equivalent:
>>>
withTimeout $ S.toList $ let s = rInsert 42 s in getR s
[42]>>>
withTimeout $ S.toList $ let s () = rInsert 42 (s ()) in getR (s ())
*** Exception: timed out
It is debatable if that is a problem.