orestis

orestis

So Python has a nice concept of generators - functions that become iterators when called:

def step(x, s):
    while True:
        yield x
        x = x + s

This is called like so:

s = step(1, 2)
s.next() # 1
s.next() # 3
s.next() # 5

And it implements the iterator protocol so you can pass it wherever an iterator is expected.

What’s the idiomatic way in Elixir to do this? We can get partway there with:

s = Stream.unfold(1, fn(x) -> {x, x+2} end)
Enum.take(s, 3) # [1, 3, 5]

But obviously this is not stateful. To get stateful, a process would be needed… But even if we don’t maintain state, I couldn’t find an easy way to do this:

{[1, 3], s} = Stream.split(s, 2)
{[5], s} = Stream.split(s, 1)

Using Enum.split blocks, probably trying to reach the end of the Stream.

Thoughts?

Showing Posts 1 to 10

NobbZ

NobbZ

Well, at least for Enum.split/2s strictness there has been a discussion recently:

This also tackles some small bits of your “state” problem.

In elixir I do usually not expect side effects to happen, so next(s) which returns 1 on the first call and 2 on the second without rebinding s would be counterintuitive for me.

If you need a central authority handing out free ids, work items, whatever, I do think that is what GenStage has been developed for.

If you really need something as your python thingy (which involves far too much magic for me, I’d expect it to loop forever) then you need to implement it yourself. Some protocol or behaviour and a handfull of macros, and you are ready to release it on hex.

orestis

orestis OP

Thanks for the link.

Re the magic, would you expect:

s = Stream.unfold(1, fn(x) -> 
  receive do
    :next -> IO.puts "hi";{x, x+2} 
  end
end)
Stream.run(s)

… to loop forever? It has similar semantics. I think I could probably implement this with the available tools, yes :slight_smile:

jwarlander

jwarlander

@orestis, it looks like StreamSplit would mostly have you covered, at least as far your example goes..

First define your iterator(s):

defmodule SplitDemo.Generators do
  def step(x, s) do
    Stream.iterate(x, &(&1 + s))
  end

  def next(stream, n \\ 1) do
    StreamSplit.take_and_drop(stream, n)
  end
end

Then call from somewhere:

import SplitDemo.Generators

s = step(1, 2)
{[1], s} = next(s)
{[3], s} = next(s)
{[5], s} = next(s)
{[7, 9, 11], s} = next(s, 3)

See my demo repo for the above example, with some output added.

NobbZ

NobbZ

Of course I do expect a stream that has no end to run forever. Stream.run/1 is documented to evaluate the complete stream.

As well as I do expect while true {} to do nothing forever, and not to do a single nothing only when I do ask for it…


After reformatting your code, I do see a little bit better what you meant. Still I’d expect that Stream to run forever and to block that process it is run in, but of course you can ask for printing “hi” and doing an otherwise useless addition if you do know the PID of the starting process.

benwilson512

benwilson512

Author of Craft GraphQL APIs in Elixir with Absinthe

An API like

s = step(1, 2)
s.next() # 1
s.next() # 3
s.next() # 5

relies upon mutable state. This is obviously impossible with Elixir when using ordinary data structures. Message passing and backing by a genserver could give you something like this, but you’re generally gonna want to avoid that.

There IS a way to get a regular immutable Enumerable to walk forward, but the API is a bit cumbersome because it requires using sort of the “internals” of how Enumerables work.

stream = Stream.cycle([1,2,3])
{:suspended, _, stream} = Enumerable.reduce(stream, {:suspend, nil}, fn(v, _) -> {:suspend, v} end)
{_, val, stream} = stream.({:cont, nil})
val #=> 1
{_, val, stream} = stream.({:cont, nil})
val #=> 2
{_, val, stream} = stream.({:cont, nil})
val #=> 3

Not the prettiest way to do that.

At the end of the day though I’d still say that the closest thing to the python

def step(x, s):
    while True:
        yield x
        x = x + s

Is the Elixir

def step(x, s) do
  Stream.unfold(x, fn(x) -> {x, x+s} end)
end

And the difference in how you use it is just part of the normal differences you get a in a pure vs impure language.

orestis

orestis OP

Thanks everyone for your thoughts.

I have currently this passing test case:

  test "generators" do
    defmodule MyGen do
      use Snakeoil.Generators

      gen "counter", x do
        yield x
        counter(x+1)
      end

      gen "two", {x, y} do
        yield x + y
        two({x+1, y + 1})
      end
    end

    pid = spawn(fn -> MyGen.counter(0) end)
    assert 0 == MyGen.next(pid)
    assert 1 == MyGen.next(pid)
    assert 2 == MyGen.next(pid)

    pid = spawn(fn -> MyGen.two({2, 3}) end)
    assert 5 == MyGen.next(pid)
    assert 7 == MyGen.next(pid)
  end

This is a toy, of course - mostly an exercise in metaprogramming. I have to admit that having optional parentheses makes things like that fun to write - but I’m not sure how fun it would be if someone did use that in their own code :slight_smile: If i’m not mistaken, Elixir also favors explicit over implicit, which is good from me, coming over from Python land.

gon782

gon782

Maybe try to leave more of Python land behind or recognize that there are things that are normal in Python that you won’t want to do in Elixir.

orestis

orestis OP

Can’t we all be friends? :slight_smile:

Every new language you learn impacts your style. Some concepts tend to stick, so naturally I want to explore how they could be replicated or what the alternatives are.

Qqwy

Qqwy

TypeCheck Core Team

The concept of a Generator is not something that is unique to Python. Someone has taken the time in the past to write a version (using message passing) in Erlang (which was also translated to Elixir) on RosettaCode. Interestingly, as the Wikipedia Article mentions, Haskell’s lazily evaluated functions are also generators and as such the Stream that is built-in in Elixir indeed is also a generator.

Of course, in an immutable+pure language, you cannot call the same function with the same value over and over nextVal(mygen); nextVal(mygen); nextVal(mygen); and expect different results (unless you ‘cheat’ by using message passing). Indeed, when you’re working with for instance a Random Number Generator in Haskell, you have two options:

  1. Call a function which takes a RNG, and returns a {randomNumber, newRNG} tuple. This is basically similar to what Enumerable does internally, which @benwilson512 talked about as well.
  2. Specify that you want an infinite stream of random numbers, and take as many numbers from that stream as you need. In this case, the generator is ‘consumed’; you’ve turned in an infinite stream of numbers.

In most functional languages (including Elixir), depending on the specific situation, one of these two ways is used. The third one, ‘cheating’ using message-passing, is often too much overhead for what you want to use the generator for. Exceptions of course do exist: A GenServer that returns guaranteed-unique identifiers, for instance.


I do wonder if we can implement a generator based on fixpoint combinators as well, by the way… :smiley:

mikulurim

mikulurim

I was reading this thread. I didn’t knwo anything about python, so if you are in my situation this tutorial help me to understand yield in python very quickily.
I love elixir!

Where Next? Top

Trending in Questions Top

water
I’m aware of 2 such projects, are there others? git: GitHub - team-alembic/realworld: A fullstack Phoenix LiveView application with back...
New
katta
I having some trouble figuring out if I have set myself too strict of standards for my production server. Currently I can handle 75% of r...
New
peck
Hi everyone. My team and I have been working on a fairly modest app based around video streaming and chat, but we’ve landed a customer t...
New
bradley
I really like the adapter patterns that ecto, nebulex, waffle, etc. use and would love find something similar for a key management servic...
New
unaware8150
Hello folks! So at work, we are seeing some situations where we have to define some “fixed” strings that are used across the codebase in...
New
Alvinkariuki
How Can I Optimise Compile Time Dependencies I have been building an elixir application for about 2 years now. Many modules and files ha...
New

Other Trending Topics Top

budgie
A little off-topic, but I feel like people here have a good head on their shoulders. I used to be quite good at making software. Was luc...
New
KristerV
Hey. Is there anyone here who creates agents in their apps? Not talking about using agents, but creating them. I’m finding it pretty diff...
New
mudasobwa
I fully migrated to my own harness from Anthropic/Gemini and I think it’s time to share it. Welcome DSH, the DeepSeek Harness, fully writ...
New
jimsynz
Beam Bots (or just BB for short) is a framework for building fault-tolerant robotics applications in Elixir using familiar OTP patterns. ...
New
juhalehtonen
There has been a thread to discuss the Stack Overflow Developer Survey on this forum every year since 2018, so here’s yet another one for...
New
budgie
I love Elixir. It’s one of 2 programming languages I’ve ever fallen in love with. But I don’t use it anymore. Serverless was the promis...
New

We're in Beta

About us Mission Statement

Options

Thread Display Mode




Thread Preview

Skip Thread Previews