问题描述
我实现了这个答案的一个版本(我不喜欢不知道回答者的意图是什么)
sublistofsize 0 _ = [[]]
sublistofsize _ [ ] = []
sublistofsize n(x:xs)= sublistsThatStartWithX ++ sublistsThatDontStartWithX
其中sublistsThatStartWithX = map(x :) $ sublistofsize(n-1)xs
sublistsThatDontStartWithX = sublistofsize n xs
我不确定的是 sublistsThatStartWithX = map(x :) $ sublistofsize (n-1)xs
我假设map(x :)给出了明智的性能问题,但不知道如何解决它。我已经完成了对的打印分析$ print $ length $ sublistofsize 5 $ primesToTakeFrom 50
成本中心模块编号。条目%时间%分配%时间%分配
sublistofsize主要112 4739871 46.9 39.9 96.9 100.0
sublistofsize.sublistsThatDontStartWithX主要124 2369935 2.2 0.0 2.2 0.0
sublistofsize.sublistsThatStartWithX主要116 2369935 47.8 60.1 47.8 60.1
我是否以良好的方式实施它?
有没有更快的方法呢?
没有。 map
被有效地编码并且以线性时间运行,这里没有问题。
然而,递归可能是一个问题。你们都在调用 sublistofsize(n-1)xs
和 sublistofsize n xs
code> sublistofsize m(_:_:ys) - 评估术语 sublistofsize(m-1)ys
两次,因为那里在不同的递归步骤中,他们之间没有共享。
所以我会应用动态编程来获得
subsequencesOfSize :: Int - > [a] - > [[a]]
subsequencesOfSize n xs = let l = length xs
in if n> l then [] else subsequencesBySize xs !! (ln)
其中
zipWith(++)([b])中的子序列大小(x:xs)= let next = subsequencesBySize xs
子序列比例[] = [[[]]]
]:next)(map(map(x :))next ++ [[]])
不是追加空列表是最漂亮的解决方案,但你可以看到我如何在移动列表中使用 zipWith
,以便从 next
被使用两次 - 一次直接在长度为n的子序列列表中,一次在长度为n + 1的子序列列表中。它在GHCI中的:set + s
,你可以看到这是如何比天真的解决方案快得多:
*主>长度$ subsequencesOfSize 7 [1..25]
480700
(0.25秒,74132648字节)
(0.28秒,73524928字节)
(0.30秒,73529004字节)
* Main>长度$ sublistofsize 7 [1..25] - @Vixen(问题)
480700
(3.03秒,470779436字节)
(3.35秒,470602932字节)
(3.14秒,470747656字节)
* Main>长度$ sublistofsize'7 [1..25] - @Ganesh
480700
(2.00秒,193610388字节)
(2.00秒,193681472字节)
* Main>长度$ subseq 7 [1..25] - @ user5402
480700
(3.07秒,485941092字节)
(3.07秒,486279608字节)
I implemented a version of this answer https://stackoverflow.com/a/9920425/1261166 (I don't know what was intended by the person answering)
sublistofsize 0 _ = [[]]
sublistofsize _ [] = []
sublistofsize n (x : xs) = sublistsThatStartWithX ++ sublistsThatDontStartWithX
where sublistsThatStartWithX = map (x:) $ sublistofsize (n-1) xs
sublistsThatDontStartWithX = sublistofsize n xs
what I'm unsure of is sublistsThatStartWithX = map (x:) $ sublistofsize (n-1) xs
I assume that map (x:) gives a problem performance wise, but not sure of how to solve it. I've done profiling on print $ length $ sublistofsize 5 $ primesToTakeFrom 50
COST CENTRE MODULE no. entries %time %alloc %time %alloc
sublistofsize Main 112 4739871 46.9 39.9 96.9 100.0
sublistofsize.sublistsThatDontStartWithX Main 124 2369935 2.2 0.0 2.2 0.0
sublistofsize.sublistsThatStartWithX Main 116 2369935 47.8 60.1 47.8 60.1
Did I implement it in a good way?Are there any faster ways of doing it?
No. map
is coded efficiently and runs in linear time, no problems here.
However, your recursion might be a problem. You're both calling sublistofsize (n-1) xs
and sublistofsize n xs
, which - given a start list sublistofsize m (_:_:ys)
- does evaluate the term sublistofsize (m-1) ys
twice, as there is no sharing between them in the different recursive steps.
So I'd apply dynamic programming to get
subsequencesOfSize :: Int -> [a] -> [[a]]
subsequencesOfSize n xs = let l = length xs
in if n>l then [] else subsequencesBySize xs !! (l-n)
where
subsequencesBySize [] = [[[]]]
subsequencesBySize (x:xs) = let next = subsequencesBySize xs
in zipWith (++) ([]:next) (map (map (x:)) next ++ [[]])
Not that appending the empty lists is the most beautiful solution, but you can see how I have used zipWith
with the displaced lists so that the results from next
are used twice - once directly in the list of subsequences of length n and once in the list of subsequences of length n+1.
Testing it in GHCI with :set +s
, you can see how this is drastically faster than the naive solutions:
*Main> length $ subsequencesOfSize 7 [1..25]
480700
(0.25 secs, 74132648 bytes)
(0.28 secs, 73524928 bytes)
(0.30 secs, 73529004 bytes)
*Main> length $ sublistofsize 7 [1..25] -- @Vixen (question)
480700
(3.03 secs, 470779436 bytes)
(3.35 secs, 470602932 bytes)
(3.14 secs, 470747656 bytes)
*Main> length $ sublistofsize' 7 [1..25] -- @Ganesh
480700
(2.00 secs, 193610388 bytes)
(2.00 secs, 193681472 bytes)
*Main> length $ subseq 7 [1..25] -- @user5402
480700
(3.07 secs, 485941092 bytes)
(3.07 secs, 486279608 bytes)
这篇关于列表性能的长度为n的子序列的文章就介绍到这了,希望我们推荐的答案对大家有所帮助,也希望大家多多支持!