On Thu, Jul 1, 2010 at 1:54 PM, Sergey Mironov <ier...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hello list!
> I am trying to understand zipper concept using papers like [1] and [2].
> Though main idea looks clear, I still have a problem in applying it for
> custom data types.
>
> Please help me with deriving Zipper-type from
>
>> data DTree a = P | D [(a, DTree)]
>
> Looking in [1] ('Zippers via Differentiation' chapter) I tried to do
> the following:
>
> 1. Find a DTreeF type which is a pattern functor ([2], chapter 2.1) of my
> DTree
> 2. Write DTreeF in 'algebraic' form (using '+' and '*')
> 3. Find DTreeF' - "derivative" of DTreeF
> 4. Define my zipper type using list of DTreeF'
>
> Step 1 likely ends with
>
>> data DTreeF a x = P | D [(a,x)]
>
> [2] says that using this pattern functor one could build a fixed-point
> version of DTree:
>
>> data Fix f = In {out :: (f (Fix f))}
>> data DTreeFP = Fix DTreeF
>
> but seems that I have nothing to do with it right now.
>
> Step 2 is my main question:
>
> In [1] authors did it for binary tree:
>
> data Tree a = Leaf a | Bin (Tree a) (Tree a)
>
> data TreeF a x = Leaf a | Bin x x
>
> and thus
>
> TreeF = a + x * x
>
> TreeF' = x + x
>
> My DTree has inner list of tuples. How should I rewrite it in terms of
> '+' and '*' ?
I would just use List. IIRC the derivative of list is:
data DList a = DLIst [a] [a]
Understood as the elements before the focused one and those after it.
Unfortunately I can't remember how that is derived, and my own
experiments failed to come up with anything similar. That may
indicate that the rest of this message is nonsense.
data DTree a = P | D [(a, DTree a)]
Can be written algebraically as:
DTree a = 1 + List (a * DTree a)
DTree a = Mu f. 1 + List (a * f)
Differentiating:
DDTree a = Mu f. DList (a * f) * a
DDTree a = DList (a * DTree a) * a
To understand this intuitively, DDTree a is the context in which a
DTree can appear within itself. So that is: The (a * DTree a)s that
appeared before and after the current list element, together with the
a that was paired with the current element.
At least that is how I understand it. I admit there was some
handwaving going on in the details.
Luke
_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
