Günther,
Miguel had the easiest suggestion to get right:
Your goal is to avoid the redundant encoding of a list of one element, so
why do you need to get rid of the Many a [] case when you can get rid of
your Single a case!
> module NE where
> import Prelude hiding (foldr, foldl, foldl1, head, tail)
> import Data.Foldable (Foldable, foldr, toList, foldl, foldl1)
> import Data.Traversable (Traversable, traverse)
> import Control.Applicative
> data NE a = NE a [a] deriving (Eq,Ord,Show,Read)
Now we can fmap over non-empty lists
> instance Functor NE where
> fmap f (NE a as) = NE (f a) (map f as)
It is clear how to append to a non-empty list.
> cons :: a -> NE a -> NE a
> a `cons` NE b bs = NE a (b:bs)
head is total.
> head :: NE a -> a
> head (NE a _) = a
tail can return an empty list, so lets model that
> tail :: NE a -> [a]
> tail (NE _ as) = as
We may not be able to construct a non-empty list from a list, if its empty
so model that.
> fromList :: [a] -> Maybe (NE a)
> fromList (x:xs) = Just (NE x xs)
> fromList [] = Nothing
We can make our non-empty lists an instance of Foldable so you can use
Data.Foldable's versions of foldl, foldr, etc. and nicely foldl1 has a very
pretty total definition, so lets use it.
> instance Foldable NE where
> foldr f z (NE a as) = a `f` foldr f z as
> foldl f z (NE a as) = foldl f (z `f` a) as
> foldl1 f (NE a as) = foldl f a as
We can traverse non-empty lists too.
> instance Traversable NE where
> traverse f (NE a as) = NE <$> f a <*> traverse f as
And they clearly offer a monadic structure:
> instance Monad NE where
> return a = NE a []
> NE a as >>= f = NE b (bs ++ concatMap (toList . f) as) where
> NE b bs = f a
and you can proceed to add suitable instance declarations for it to be a
Comonad if you are me, etc.
Now a singleton list has one representation
NE a []
A list with two elements can only be represented by NE a [b]
And so on for NE a [b,c], NE 1 [2..], etc.
You could also make the
> data Container a = Single a | Many a (Container a)
definition work that Jake McArthur provided. For the category theory
inspired reader Jake's definition is equivalent to the Cofree comonad of the
Maybe functor, which can encode a non-empty list.
I leave that one as an exercise for the reader, but observe
Single 1
Many 1 (Single 2)
Many 1 (Many 2 (Single 3))
And the return for this particular monad is easy:
instance Monad Container where
return = Single
In general Jake's non-empty list is a little nicer because it avoids a
useless [] constructor at the end of the list.
-Edward Kmett
On Thu, Jun 4, 2009 at 5:53 PM, GüŸnther Schmidt <gue.schm...@web.de> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I need to design a container data structure that by design cannot be empty
> and can hold n elements. Something like a non-empty list.
>
>
> I started with:
>
> data Container a = Single a | Many a [a]
>
> but the problem above is that the data structure would allow to construct a
> Many 5 [] :: Container Int.
>
> I can't figure out how to get this right. :(
>
> Please help.
>
> Günther
>
> _______________________________________________
> Haskell-Cafe mailing list
> Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
> http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
>
_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
