przemyxe0p

przemyxe0p

What do you do if you can not comprehend solution?

What do you do if you’ve done an exercise, it works, it’s not very inefficient and seems concise, then you go to the community solutions, sort by highest-rated user and see this?

defmodule Sublist do
  @doc """
  Returns whether the first list is a sublist or a superlist of the second list
  and if not whether it is equal or unequal to the second list.
  """
  def compare(a, b) when is_list(a) and is_list(b) do
    case {contains?(a, b), contains?(b,a)} do
      {true, true} -> :equal
      {true, false} -> :superlist
      {false, true} -> :sublist
      {false, false} -> :unequal
    end
  end

  # determines if list a contains list b. restore_a is needed to restore
  # already "eaten" members of a, when b couldn't be matched completely
  defp contains?(a, b, current_b \\ :initial, restore_a \\ nil)
  defp contains?(a, b, :initial, nil), do: contains?(a, b, b, nil)
  defp contains?(_, _, [], _), do: true
  defp contains?([], _, _, _), do: false
  defp contains?([x | a], b, [x | c], nil), do: contains?(a, b, c, a)
  defp contains?([x | a], b, [x | c], restore_a), do: contains?(a, b, c, restore_a)
  defp contains?([_ | a], b, _, nil), do: contains?(a, b, b, nil)
  defp contains?(_, b, _, restore_a), do: contains?(restore_a, b, b, nil)
end

To clarify I enjoy creating solutions, and having to think, and play, but there is border.

Marked As Solved

mudasobwa

mudasobwa

Creator of Cure

Create your own wrapper my_contains?/4 which would print the intermediate results and run it for several different inputs.

  def compare(a, b) when is_list(a) and is_list(b) do
    case {my_contains?(a, b), my_contains?(b,a)} do
      {true, true} -> :equal
      {true, false} -> :superlist
      {false, true} -> :sublist
      {false, false} -> :unequal
    end
  end

  defp my_contains?(a, b, current_b \\ :initial, restore_a \\ nil) do
    IO.inspect(a: a, b: b, current_b: current_b, restore_a: restore_a)
    contains?(a, b, current_b, restore_a)
  end

  defp contains?(a, b, current_b \\ :initial, restore_a \\ nil)
  defp contains?(a, b, :initial, nil), do: my_contains?(a, b, b, nil)
  defp contains?(_, _, [], _), do: true
  defp contains?([], _, _, _), do: false
  defp contains?([x | a], b, [x | c], nil), do: my_contains?(a, b, c, a)
  defp contains?([x | a], b, [x | c], restore_a), do: my_contains?(a, b, c, restore_a)
  defp contains?([_ | a], b, _, nil), do: my_contains?(a, b, b, nil)
  defp contains?(_, b, _, restore_a), do: my_contains?(restore_a, b, b, nil)```

Also Liked

derek-zhou

derek-zhou

The code you cited seems fine to me, pretty clever use of tail recursion. I am not sure what do you mean. do you mean:

  • You don’t like this code. Of course you can have a opinion and choose to use your own code. or:
  • You like this code but wish some one to explain to you in digestible pieces. Then you did not say which part you do not understand. Or:
  • You don’t care about this code at all, all you care is to win the competition to provide the best solution. Then it is a matter of skill issue, right?
derek-zhou

derek-zhou

The correct reading order is from the top to bottom. If you want to improve your skill on tail recursion, write with it. Can you implement the enumerating functions in Enum, starting with Enum.reverse/1, with tail recursion? If you can write comfortably in tail recursion, it will click for you.

przemyxe0p

przemyxe0p

  @spec flatten(list) :: list
  def flatten(list), do: fl(list) |> Enum.reverse()

  defp fl(list, acc \\ [])

  defp fl([], acc), do: acc

  defp fl([[_|_] = el | tail], acc), do: fl(el, acc) |> then(&fl(tail, &1))
  defp fl([nil | tail], acc), do: fl(tail, acc)
  defp fl([el | tail], acc),do: fl(tail, [el | acc])

I guess we should reverse at the end, not on intermediate states, and your suggestion would not work (I tested it).

How to tell if my above solution is proper tail-call recursion?

Where Next?

Popular in Challenges Top

sukhmeetsd
All in all, from what I understand, it is better not to use GenServer.cast when we want some concurrent operations to happen for sure, be...
New
bjorng
Note: This topic is to talk about Day 2 of the Advent of Code 2019 . There is a private leaderboard for elixirforum members. You can joi...
New
dominicletz
This topic is about Day 8 of the Advent of Code 2020 . Thanks to @egze, we have a private leaderboard: https://adventofcode.com/2020/le...
New
Aetherus
This topic is about Day 15 of the Advent of Code 2020 . Thanks to @egze, we have a private leaderboard: https://adventofcode.com/2020/l...
New
bjorng
This topic is about Day 17 of the Advent of Code 2020 . Thanks to @egze, we have a private leaderboard: https://adventofcode.com/2020/l...
New
code-shoily
Just did part 1. Part 2 seems to be demanding too much of my reading time so will get to that after I am done with some chores. Oh here ...
New
Aetherus
Today’s challenge is quite interesting. I ended up using Zipper to solve this problem. Maybe I overengineered quite a bit. The data stru...
New

Other popular topics Top

joaquinalcerro
Hi there, I am working with Ecto-Postgresql and I need to call all of the records from a specific table but the table has 40,000 records...
New
New
Brian
What is the proper way to load a module from a file in to IEX? In the python world, doing something like this pretty standard: from ....
New
stefanchrobot
What’s the safe way to decode a JSON string into a struct? I want to avoid calling String.to_atom. Jason.decode can give me a map with st...
New
aadeshere1
I have a another noob question about loop. Since elixir is immutable, while loop is not directly possible. total = 10 while total != 0 ...
New
msaraiva
Surface is an experimental library built on top of Phoenix LiveView and its new LiveComponent API that aims to provide a more declarative...
564 44265 214
New

We're in Beta

About us Mission Statement