Homework 2
Type classes
This homework is written in literate Haskell; you can download the raw source to fill in yourself. You’re welcome to submit literate Haskell yourself, or to start fresh in a new file, literate or not.
Please submit homeworks via the new submission page.
This homework will be “buddy programmed”. Consider it a lighter version of pair programming: you and your partner should work next to each other, but on separate files. Please submit individually, without marking your partner as a collaborator (which makes it a team submission).
In this homework, we’re going to use Haskell more earnestly. We’ll start using some of its standard library’s functions and datatypes—we’ll even try defining our own datatypes.
Unless I say otherwise, you’re free to use any functions from the Prelude.
module Hw02 where
Problem 1: arithmetic expressions
Our first language will be a simple one: arithmetic expressions using +, *, and negation.
data ArithExp =
Num Int
| Plus ArithExp ArithExp
| Times ArithExp ArithExp
| Neg ArithExp
(a) 5 points
Write a Show
instance for ArithExp
, which amounts to a function show :: ArithExp -> String
. You do not need to write type signatures for functions in type class instances.
Your function should print a parseable expression, i.e., one that you could copy and paste back in to Haskell to regenerate the original term. For example, show (Num 5)
should yield the string "Num 5"
, while show (Neg (Plus (Num 1) (Num 1)))
should yield the string "Neg (Plus (Num 1) (Num 1))"
.
instance Show ArithExp where
show = undefined
(b) 5 points
Write an Eq
instance for ArithExp
, defining a function (==) :: ArithExp -> ArithExp -> Bool
; use the standard “equal structures are equal” interpretation.
instance Eq ArithExp where
e1 == e2 = undefined
(c) 10 points
We’re going to write an interpreter, which takes an arithmetic expression and evaluates it to a number. The general strategy here is the same as when we wrote naturally recursive functions over lists: break down each case of the datatype definition and use recursion on subparts.
For example, eval (Plus (Num 42) (Neg (Num 42)))
should yield 0
.
eval :: ArithExp -> Int
eval = undefined
(d) 10 points
Let’s extend our language to support subtraction—now we’re really cooking! Note that we let Haskell derive a “parseable” show instance for us.
data ArithExp' =
Num' Int
| Plus' ArithExp' ArithExp'
| Sub' ArithExp' ArithExp'
| Times' ArithExp' ArithExp'
| Neg' ArithExp'
deriving Show
But wait: we should be able to encode subtraction using what we have, giving us a very nice evaluation function.
eval' :: ArithExp' -> Int
eval' = eval . translate
Write a function that will translate this extended language to our original language—make sure that eval'
does the right thing.
translate :: ArithExp' -> ArithExp
translate = undefined
(e) 5 points
Write a non-standard Eq
instance for ArithExp'
, where e1 == e2
iff they evaluate to the same number, e.g., (Num 2) == (Plus (Num 1) (Num 1))
should return `True.
instance Eq ArithExp' where
e1 == e2 = undefined
Write a non-standard Ord
instance for ArithExp
that goes with the Eq
instance, i.e., e1 < e2
iff e1
evaluates to a lower number than e2
, etc.
instance Ord ArithExp' where
compare e1 e2 = undefined
Problem 2: Setlike
(10pts)
Here is a type class Setlike
. A given type constructor f
, of kind * -> *
, is Setlike
if we can implement the following methods for it. (See Listlike
in the notes for lecture.)
class Setlike f where
emp :: f a
singleton :: a -> f a
union :: Ord a => f a -> f a -> f a
union = fold insert
insert :: Ord a => a -> f a -> f a
insert = union . singleton
delete :: Ord a => a -> f a -> f a
delete x s = fold (\y s' -> if x == y then s' else insert y s') emp s
isEmpty :: f a -> Bool
isEmpty = (==0) . size
size :: f a -> Int
size = fold (\_ count -> count + 1) 0
isIn :: Ord a => a -> f a -> Bool
isIn x s = maybe False (const True) $ getElem x s
getElem :: Ord a => a -> f a -> Maybe a
fold :: (a -> b -> b) -> b -> f a -> b
toAscList :: f a -> [a] -- must return the list sorted ascending
toAscList = fold (:) []
In the rest of this problem, you’ll define some instances for Setlike
and write some code using the Setlike
interface. Please write the best code you can. Setlike
has some default definitions, but sometimes you can write a function that’s more efficient than the default. Do it. Write good code.
Hint: look carefully at the types, and notice that sometimes we have an Ord
constraint and sometimes we don’t. I did that deliberately… what am I trying to tell you about how your code should work?
Define an instance of Setlike
for lists. Here’s an example that should work when you’re done—it should be the set {0,2,4,6,8} (note that I’m using math notation for sets—yours will probably print out as a list)..
evensUpToTen :: [Int]
evensUpToTen = foldr insert emp [0,2,4,6,8]
Here’s a type of binary trees. Define a Setlike
for BSTs, using binary search algorithms. Write good code. I expect insertion, lookup, and deletion to all be O(log n). No need to do any balancing, though.
data BST a = Empty | Node (BST a) a (BST a)
Write Eq
and Show
instances for BSTs. These might be easier to write using the functions below.
instance Ord a => Eq (BST a) where
s1 == s2 = undefined
instance Show a => Show (BST a) where
show = undefined
Write the following set functions. You’ll have to use the Setlike
interface, since you won’t know which implementation you get.
fromList
should convert a list to a set.
fromList :: (Setlike f, Ord a) => [a] -> f a
fromList = undefined
difference
should compute the set difference: X - Y = { x in X | x not in Y }.
difference :: (Setlike f, Ord a) => f a -> f a -> f a
difference xs ys = undefined
subset
should determine whether the first set is a subset of the other one. X ⊆ Y iff ∀ x. x ∈ X implies x ∈ Y.
subset :: (Setlike f, Ord a) => f a -> f a -> Bool
subset xs ys = undefined
Problem 3: maps from sets (10pts)
Finally, let’s use sets to define maps—a classic data structure approach.
We’ll define a special notion of key-value pairs, KV k v
, with instances to force comparisons just on the key part.
newtype KV k v = KV { kv :: (k,v) }
instance Eq k => Eq (KV k v) where
(KV kv1) == (KV kv2) = fst kv1 == fst kv2
instance Ord k => Ord (KV k v) where
compare (KV kv1) (KV kv2) = compare (fst kv1) (fst kv2)
instance (Show k, Show v) => Show (KV k v) where
show (KV (k,v)) = show k ++ " |-> " ++ show v
type Map f k v = f (KV k v)
type ListMap k v = Map [] k v
type TreeMap k v = Map BST k v
Now define the following map functions that work with Setlike
.
emptyMap :: Setlike f => Map f k v
emptyMap = undefined
lookup :: (Setlike f, Ord k) => k -> Map f k v -> Maybe v
lookup k m = undefined
extend :: (Setlike f, Ord k) => k -> v -> Map f k v -> Map f k v
extend k v m = undefined
remove :: (Setlike f, Ord k) => k -> Map f k v -> Map f k v
remove k m = undefined
toAssocList :: Setlike f => Map f k v -> [(k,v)]
toAssocList = undefined
You’ll have to think hard about what to do for lookup
and remove
… what should v
be?
Problem 4: functors (15pts)
(a) 5pts
The n-ary tree, trie, or rose tree data structure is a tree with an arbitrary number of children at each node. We can define it simply in Haskell:
data RoseTree a = Leaf a | Branch [RoseTree a] deriving (Eq, Show)
(Note that this definition subtly disagrees with the Wikipedia definition of rose trees by (a) having values at the leaves and (b) not having values at the nodes.)
Define a Functor
instance for RoseTree
.
instance Functor RoseTree where
fmap = undefined
(b) 10pts
Define a Functor
instance for BST
.
Give an example of a buggy behavior for your instance: this can either be a violation of the Functor
laws, or something else. Explain what the issue is.