Let me explain what I mean. Take any Java/Scala class with at least two fields in it. Implementing the comparison function, whether in Scala or Java is typically going to look like this (from the source of java.time.LocalDate.java):
int compareTo0(LocalDate otherDate) { int cmp = (year - otherDate.year); if (cmp == 0) { cmp = (month - otherDate.month); if (cmp == 0) { cmp = (day - otherDate.day); } } return cmp; }
Do you see how ugly (and non-functional) that code is? It's fine in Java, because Java code expects to be a mix of assignments, if clauses, loops, etc. But Scala code expects to be expression-oriented, not statement-oriented. And there's no reason not to do it better in Scala, because we can create a type which can represent either equality, or difference. To be fair, Java could do this too, but that ship sailed long ago.
So, how about this type?--Comparison--a trait which extends Function0[Option[Boolean]]:
sealed trait Comparison extends (() => Option[Boolean]) { override def toString(): String = apply.toString def toInt: Int = apply match { case Some(b) => if (b) -1 else 1; case _ => 0 } def orElse(c: => Comparison): Comparison = Comparison(apply.orElse(c())) def flip: Comparison = Comparison(for (v <- apply) yield !v) } case class Different(less: Boolean) extends Comparison { def apply: Option[Boolean] = Some(less) } case object Same extends Comparison { def apply: Option[Boolean] = None } object Comparison { val more = Different(false) val less = Different(true) def apply(x: Option[Boolean]): Comparison = x match { case Some(b) => Different(b); case _ => Same } def apply(x: Int): Comparison = x match { case 0 => Same; case _ => Comparison(Some(x < 0)) } }
Thus, invoking the apply method of Comparison can yield one of three different instances: Some(true), Some(false), and None. These are quite sufficient to represent the result of a comparison of two objects.
Now that we have a way of expressing the result of a comparison, we can create a comparer type (note that the names Comparable, Comparator, Ordered, and Ordering are already in use). Let's choose the name as Orderable. Of course, like Ordering, we would like it to be a type class (actually we'd like it to replace Ordering). So we need another trait (unsealed, this time) like the following:
trait Orderable[T] extends (((T, T)) => Comparison) {self => def toOrdering: Ordering[T] = new Ordering[T]() { def compare(x: T, y: T): Int = self(x, y).toInt } def >(tt: (T, T)): Boolean = apply(tt.swap)().getOrElse(false) def <(tt: (T, T)): Boolean = apply(tt)().getOrElse(false) def ==(tt: (T, T)): Boolean = apply(tt)().isEmpty def >=(tt: (T, T)): Boolean = ! <(tt) def <=(tt: (T, T)): Boolean = ! >(tt) def !=(tt: (T, T)): Boolean = ! ==(tt) def compose(f: Comparison => Comparison): Orderable[T] = new Orderable[T]() { def apply(tt: (T, T)): Comparison = f(self(tt)) } def orElse(o: Orderable[T]): Orderable[T] = new Orderable[T]() { def apply(tt: (T, T)): Comparison = self(tt).orElse(o(tt)) } def invert: Orderable[T] = compose(_ flip) } object Orderable { implicit val intOrderable: Orderable[Int] = Ordering[Int] implicit val strOrderable: Orderable[String] = Ordering[String] implicit def convert[T](x: Ordering[T]): Orderable[T] = new Orderable[T] { def apply(tt: (T, T)) = Comparison(x.compare(tt._1, tt._2)) } }
There is one other minor difference here. Since we always implement the comparison function (here, it is the apply method) on a pair of T elements, we might as well make the input a Tuple2 of T. We can always convert to untupled form when necessary.
Note also the compose method which allows us to create a new Orderable based on this Orderable and a function from Comparison to Comparison.
And, in the following, we can see how the whole mechanism allows us to create a lazy sorted object, which only does an actual sort when the result is required:
If you're interested to see a specification file, or an App for this, you can see find them in LaScala. under the package com/phasmid/laScala/sort.
Note also the compose method which allows us to create a new Orderable based on this Orderable and a function from Comparison to Comparison.
And, in the following, we can see how the whole mechanism allows us to create a lazy sorted object, which only does an actual sort when the result is required:
case class Sorted[T](ts: Seq[T])(implicit f: Orderable[T]) extends (() => Seq[T]) { implicit val ordering: Ordering[T] = f.toOrdering def sort(o: Orderable[T]): Sorted[T] = Sorted(ts)(f orElse o) def apply: Seq[T] = ts.sorted def async(implicit ec: ExecutionContext): Future[Seq[T]] = Future(apply) def parSort(implicit ec: ExecutionContext): Future[Seq[T]] = Sorted.mergeSort(ts) } object Sorted { def create[T: Ordering](ts: Seq[T]): Sorted[T] = Sorted(ts)(implicitly[Ordering[T]]) def verify[T: Orderable](xs: Seq[T]): Boolean = xs.zip(xs.tail).forall(z => implicitly[Orderable[T]].<=(z._1,z._2)) def parSort[T: Ordering](tst: (Seq[T], Seq[T]))(implicit ec: ExecutionContext): Future[Seq[T]] = map2(Future(tst._1.sorted), Future(tst._2.sorted))(merge) def mergeSort[T: Ordering](ts: Seq[T])(implicit ec: ExecutionContext): Future[Seq[T]] = parSort(ts splitAt (ts.length/2)) def merge[T: Ordering](ts1: Seq[T], ts2: Seq[T]): Seq[T] = { val ordering = implicitly[Ordering[T]] @tailrec def inner(r: Seq[T], xs: Seq[T], ys: Seq[T]): Seq[T] = (xs, ys) match { case (_, Nil) => r ++ xs case (Nil, _) => r ++ ys case (x :: xs1, y :: ys1) => if (ordering.lt(x, y)) inner(r :+ x, xs1, ys) else inner(r :+ y, xs, ys1) } inner(Nil, ts1, ts2) } def map2[T: Ordering](t1f: Future[Seq[T]], t2f: Future[Seq[T]])(f: (Seq[T], Seq[T]) => Seq[T])(implicit ec: ExecutionContext): Future[Seq[T]] = for {t1 <- t1f; t2 <- t2f} yield f(t1, t2) }
No comments:
Post a Comment