Thanks Gabriel!  This was very helpful :)

I've updated the repo with my modifications, and I had a couple of comments.

1. Deleting `runEffect` appears to bring about a type error, trying to 
unify the Proxy type with IO ().  Did I do something wrong here?
2. Is there anywhere I can read up on Consumer' and (>~)?  I sort of have 
been avoided using them because I don't fully understand the differences 
between the (>->) category and the (>~) category, actually.  Consumer' is 
just Consumer, but with the output not technically "closed" off for good 
(just effectively), right?  And how does (>~ cat) turn it into a Pipe?

Thank you again!

Justin

On Friday, May 2, 2014 4:06:07 PM UTC-7, Gabriel Gonzalez wrote:
>
>  This is the perfect kind of question to post to the mailing list!
>
> I will go down the two programs and make minor comments and then review 
> their overall structure.
>
> -- encode.hs
>
> * Delete `runEffect`.  It's not doing anything.  The reason that it still 
> type-checked was because your base monad was polymorphic over `MonadIO`, so 
> it let you accidentally insert an additional `Pipe` layer (which was not 
> doing anything).  As a side note, I think I made a mistake by parametrizing 
> the `Pipes.Prelude` utilities over `MonadIO` (I prefer using `hoist` now), 
> but I don't want to make a breaking change to fix it.
>
> * Good use of `withFile` instead of `pipes-safe`.  I feel like too many 
> people unnecessarily use `pipes-safe` when `withFile` suffices.
>
> * Use `view Pipes.ByteString.pack p` instead of `p >-> PP.map 
> B.singleton`.  It will group your Word8's into a more efficient chunk 
> size.  Your current formulation will call a separate write command for 
> every single byte, which is very inefficient.
>
> * For the reverse direction (i.e. `bytes`), you can either:
>
> A) Use `view (from Pipes.ByteString.pack)`, but that requires a `lens` 
> dependency (which I think is not good).  I plan to fix that by providing an 
> `unpack` lens in an upcoming `pipes-bytestring` release.  I created an 
> issue for this:
>
> https://github.com/Gabriel439/Haskell-Pipes-ByteString-Library/issues/36
>
> B) Use `mapFoldable`:
>
>     bytes = Pipes.Prelude.mapFoldable BS.unpack
>
> That's much more efficient.  The problem with your `bytes` function is 
> that it uses `foldl`, which triggers a bunch of left-associated binds, 
> generating quadratic time complexity in the number of bytes:
>
>     ((((return ()) >> yield byte1) >> yield byte2) >> yield byte3
>
> `mapFoldable`, on the other hand, is implemented in terms of `each`, which 
> uses a right-fold like this:
>
>     each = Data.Foldable.foldr (\a p -> yield a >> p) (return ())
>
> ... which triggers build/fold fusion and also gives linear time complexity:
>
>     yield byte1 >> (yield byte2 >> (yield byte3 >> return ()))
>
> * If you're willing to skip the error message, you can shorten 
> `encodeByte` to:
>
>     encodeByte t = for cat $ \b -> each (b `M.lookup` t)
>
> ... which is the same thing as:
>
>     encodeByte t = Pipes.Prelude.mapFoldable (`M.lookup` t)
>
> * I should probably provide a function that transforms `Parser`s to 
> functions between `Producer`s to simplify your `dirsBytes` code.  I also 
> find myself writing that same pattern way too many times.  I just created 
> an issue to remind myself to do this:
>
> https://github.com/Gabriel439/Haskell-Pipes-Parse-Library/issues/28
>
> -- decode.hs
>
> * Is there any reason why you `drain` unused input using `limit` instead 
> of just using `take` by itself?
>
> * Same thing as `encode`.hs: try using `Pipes.ByteString.pack` and 
> `Pipes.Prelude.mapFoldable Data.ByteString.unpack` for much greater 
> efficiency translating between `Word8`s and `ByteString`s
>
> * You can make the code for `searchPT` more reusable by first defining a 
> `Consumer'` (note the prime!) that produces a single `Direction`, like this:
>
>      searchPT :: forall m. Monad m => PreTree Word8 -> Consumer' 
> Direction m Word8
>     searchPT pt0 = go pt0
>       where
>         go :: PreTree Word8 -> Consumer Direction m Word8
>         go (PTLeaf x      ) = return x
>         go (PTNode pt1 pt2) = do
>             dir <- await
>             go $ case dir of
>                 DLeft  -> pt1
>                 DRight -> pt2
>
> ... and then you can optionally upgrade that to a `Pipe` like this:
>
>     searchPT pt >~ cat :: Pipe Direction Word8 m r
>
> That decouples the logic for parsing one direction from the logic for 
> looping.
>
> * Also, there's nothing `Word8`-specific about your `searchPT` function.  
> Consider generalizing the type to any value.
>
> * You can simplify the implementation of `dirs` using `mapFoldable`:
>
>     dirs = Pipes.Prelude.mapFoldable byteToDirs
>
> Overall the architecture of your program looks correct.  I don't see any 
> obvious non-idiomatic things that you are doing.
>
> On 5/2/14, 2:43 AM, Justin Le wrote:
>  
> Hi pipes people; 
>
>  I really don't know too much about pipes, but an entire section in a 
> project tutorial I am writing is going to be dedicated to hooking up all of 
> the pipes plumbing together.  Seeing as this might also be possibly used as 
> a pipes tutorial, I just wanted to make sure that my pipes code is 
> idiomatic/not awful/not going to set back your progress by generations. 
>  Does anyone mind maybe giving it a quick look over? :)  I would really 
> appreciate it, and credit will be given where deserved :)  I hope it is not 
> too imposing for me to ask!
>
>  It's actually a pair of programs --- a Huffman compression encoder and 
> decoder.
>
>  The encoder: 
> https://github.com/mstksg/inCode/blob/master/code-samples/huffman/encode.hs
> The decoer: 
> https://github.com/mstksg/inCode/blob/master/code-samples/huffman/decode.hs
>
>  I tried my best to abstract away the actual mechanisms of the huffman 
> logic where I could; it does peak in at some times, but the comments should 
> give you a general high-level idea of what each function is trying to do. 
>  For reference, the series itself explaining the logic is hosted at 
> http://blog.jle.im/entries/series/+huffman-compression
>
>  I am pretty sure that the code gives away my unfamiliarity :)
>
>  Thank you all!
> Justin
>  -- 
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "Haskell Pipes" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
> email to [email protected] <javascript:>.
> To post to this group, send email to [email protected]<javascript:>
> .
>
>
>  

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Haskell Pipes" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].

Reply via email to