Learn You a Haskell shows the intersperse
function:
ghci> intersperse '.' "MONKEY"
"M.O.N.K.E.Y"
ghci> intersperse 0 [1,2,3,4,5,6]
[1,0,2,0,3,0,4,0,5,0,6]
Note that the interspersed element only appears inside of the elements.
list elem ... item ... list elem ..... item .. list elem
Originally, I tried to write this function in terms of a fold
.
intersperse' :: [a] -> a -> [a]
intersperse' ys i = foldl (\acc x -> acc ++ [x] ++ [i]) [] ys
But, my approach failed since interspersed item was getting appended to the last element. Also, the lambda appended (++
) to the acc
each time, which isn't good.
So I decided to use pattern matching
:
is' :: [a] -> a -> [a]
is' [] _ = []
is' (x:xs) i
| null xs = [x]
| otherwise = x : (i : (is' xs i))
Could the fold
approach have worked? If so, how? Also, how's my is'
implementation?
2 Answers 2
Could the fold approach have worked? If so, how?
intersperse' i = foldr (\x ys -> x : if null ys then [] else i : ys) []
In the fold, we cannot access the rest of the input, only the rest of the output. However, if and only if the input was empty, the output will be empty. So null ys
happens to works here.
Interesting aspects:
I changed the argument order to match the standard
intersperse
. This happens to work better with the foldr-based definition. More importantely, I feel thatintersperse
is more often partially applied with an element than with a list, so the element should go first.I use
foldr
instead offoldl
to increase laziness and avoid the accumulator construction. Note how I don't needacc ++ [x]
because I only add elements to the front of lists.I make sure that
intersperse'
produces the first(:)
cell before thenull
check.
Just include some "special handling" for the first element:
intersperse' x (y:zs) = y : foldr (\z acc -> x : z : acc) [] zs
//or shorter
intersperse' x (y:zs) = y : concat [[x,z] | z <- zs]
//or monadic madness
intersperse' x (y:ys) = y : (ys >>= (x:).return)