_|_ `seq` Lecture 8

Table of contents

DList

Example: List concatenation

trinity :: [a] -> [a] -> [a] -> [a]
-- which one should we not use?
trinity a b c = a ++ b ++ c
trinity a b c = a ++ (b ++ c)
trinity a b c = (a ++ b) ++ c

How to place the parentheses?

Does it even matter?

infixr 5 ++
(++) :: [a] -> [a] -> [a]
[]     ++ b = b
(x:xs) ++ b = x : (xs ++ b)
a =  [1..n] ++ ([1..m]  ++ [1..k]) 
   = [1..n] ++ [1..m, 1..k]      -- m operations
   = [1..n, 1..m, 1..k]          -- n operations
                                 -- m + n total operations
b = ([1..n] ++ [1..m]) ++ [1..k] 
   = [1..n, 1..m] ++ [1..k]      -- n operations
   = [1..n, 1..m, 1..k]          -- n + m operations
                                 -- 2n + m total operations
sum :: [Int] -> Int
sum (x:xs) = x + sum xs
sum []     = 0

Using equational reasoning

Here comes the Difference List

-- import Data.DList
newtype DList a = DL { unDL :: [a] -> [a] }

fromList :: [a] -> DList a
fromList l = DL (l++)

toList :: DList a -> [a] 
toList (DL lf) = lf []
append :: DList a -> DList a -> DList a
(DL f) `append` (DL g) = DL $ \xs -> f (g xs)  -- append = mappend = <>
DL f <> (DL g <> DL h) ≡ DL f <> DL (\xs -> g (h xs)) 
                       ≡ DL f <> DL (\xs -> g' ++ (h' ++ xs))  -- t ≡ (\xs -> ...)
                       ≡ DL f <> DL t
                       ≡ DL $ \ys -> f (t ys) 
                       ≡ DL $ \ys -> f' ++ (t ys)
                       ≡ DL $ \ys -> f' ++ (g' ++ (h' ++ ys)) 
(DL f <> DL g) <> DL h ≡ DL (\xs -> f (g xs)) <> DL h 
                       ≡ DL (\xs -> f' ++ (g' ++ xs)) <> DL h  -- t ≡ (\xs -> ...)
                       ≡ DL t <> DL h
                       ≡ DL $ \ys -> t (h ys) 
                       ≡ DL $ \ys -> t (h' ++ ys)
                       ≡ DL $ \ys -> f' ++ (g' ++ (h' ++ ys)) 

Efficient sequences

If you really need efficient sequences:

Seq from Data.Sequence: a finger-tree-based sequence

Strictness

seq

Force evaluation with pattern matching

_|_  -- ⊥, bottom
seq :: a -> b -> b  -- just a model, not a real implementation
_|_ `seq` _ = _|_
_   `seq` b = b

seq evaluates the first argument to its WHNF before evaluating the second one

'Bottom' refers to a computation which never completes successfully (i.e. diverges)

'Bottom' is a member of any type

undefined :: a -- 'bottom', in Haskell

seq quiz

ghci> 0 `seq` 10
10
ghci> undefined `seq` 10
*** Exception: Prelude.undefined
ghci> Just undefined `seq` 10
10        -- (͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
data    DataWrapper a    = DW a
newtype NewtypeWrapper a = NW a

ghci> DW undefined `seq` 42
42
ghci> NW undefined `seq` 42
*** Exception: Prelude.undefined

foldr vs. foldl

module Main where

main :: IO ()
main = print $ foldr (+) 0 [1..10^7]
$ ghc --make Main.hs
$ ./Main

10^7: both 'foldr' and 'foldl' are slow

10^8: may crash your system; don't run without a memory limit!

module Main where

import Data.List (foldl')

main :: IO ()
main = print $ foldl' (+) 0 [1..10^7]

10^7: calculates instantly!

10^8: calculates fast and doesn't crash!

foldr :: (a -> b -> b) -> b -> [a] -> b
foldr _ z []     = z
foldr f z (x:xs) = x `f` foldr f z xs 

foldl :: (b -> a -> b) -> b -> [a] -> b
foldl _ z []     = z
foldl f z (x:xs) = foldl f (z `f` x) xs
sum [1, 2, 3] ≡ foldr (+) 0 [1, 2, 3]
              ≡ 1 + foldr (+) 0 [2, 3]
              ≡ 1 + (2 + foldr (+) 0 [3])
              ≡ 1 + (2 + (3 + foldr (+) 0 []))
              ≡ 1 + (2 + (3 + 0))
              ≡ 1 + (2 + 3)
              ≡ 1 + 5
              ≡ 6
sum [1, 2, 3] ≡ foldl (+) 0 [1, 2, 3]
              ≡ foldl (+) (0 + 1) [2, 3]
              ≡ foldl (+) ((0 + 1) + 2) [3]
              ≡ foldl (+) (((0 + 1) + 2) + 3) []
              ≡ ((0 + 1) + 2) + 3
              ≡ (1 + 2) + 3
              ≡ 3 + 3
              ≡ 6
> foldr (&&) False (repeat False)
> foldl (&&) False (repeat False)

ER on foldr and foldl

sum [1, 2, 3] ≡ foldl' (+) 0 [1, 2, 3]
              ≡ foldl' (+) 1 [2, 3]
              ≡ foldl' (+) 3 [3]
              ≡ foldl' (+) 6 []
              ≡ 6

What does foldl' do?

foldl' :: (a -> b -> a) -> a -> [b] -> a
foldl' f a []     = a
foldl' f a (x:xs) = let a' = f a x
                    in seq a' (foldl' f a' xs)

How ​seq helps

f (acc, len) x = (acc + x, len + 1)

foldl' f (0, 0) [1, 2, 3]
 = foldl' f (0 + 1, 0 + 1) [2, 3]
 = foldl' f ((0 + 1) + 2, (0 + 1) + 1) [3]
 = foldl' f (((0 + 1) + 2) + 3, ((0 + 1) + 1) + 1) []
 = (((0 + 1) + 2) + 3, ((0 + 1) + 1) + 1)

seq doesn't quite help...

deepseq

ghci> import Control.DeepSeq
ghci> [1,2,undefined] `seq` 3
3
ghci> [1,2,undefined] `deepseq` 3
*** Exception: Prelude.undefined
-- ??
ghci> repeat False `seq`     15 
ghci> repeat False `deepseq` 15  

NFData

class NFData a where  -- Normal Form Data
    rnf :: a -> ()
    rnf a = a `seq` ()

The 'Once' trick to avoid excessive rnf calls

instance NFData a => NFData (Maybe a) where
    rnf Nothing  = ()
    rnf (Just x) = rnf x

instance NFData a => NFData [a] where
    rnf []     = ()
    rnf (x:xs) = rnf x `seq` rnf xs
deepseq :: NFData a => a -> b -> b
a `deepseq` b = rnf a `seq` b

Why do we need a typeclass for deepseq?

sum

sum :: Num a => [a] -> a
sum []     = 0
sum (x:xs) = x + sum xs

What's wrong with all these implementations?

newtype Sum a = Sum { getSum :: a }

instance Num a => Monoid (Sum a) where
    mempty = Sum 0
    Sum x `mappend` Sum y = Sum (x + y)

sum :: Num a => [a] -> a
sum = getSum . foldMap Sum
sum :: Num a => [a] -> a
sum = go 0
  where
    go acc (x:xs) = go (acc + x) xs
    go acc []     = acc

I

II

III

sum [1,2,3] ≡ 1 + sum [2,3] 
            ≡ 1 + (2 + sum [3])
            ≡ 1 + (2 + (3 + sum []))
            ≡ 1 + (2 + (3 + 0))
            ≡ 1 + (2 + 3)
            ≡ 1 + 5
            ≡ 6

-XBangPatterns

sum :: Num a => [a] -> a
sum = go 0
  where
    go acc (x:xs) = go (acc + x) xs  -- the 'acc' pattern is too lazy
    go acc []     = acc
{-# LANGUAGE BangPatterns #-}

sum :: Num a => [a] -> a
sum = go 0
  where
    go !acc (x:xs) = go (acc + x) xs
    go  acc []     = acc
sum :: Num a => [a] -> a
sum = go 0
  where
    go acc _ | acc `seq` False = undefined  -- that's why we need `seq`
    go acc (x:xs)              = go (acc + x) xs
    go acc []                  = acc

It's a syntactic sugar for:

More bang patterns

stackOps :: State Stack Int  -- type Stack = [Int]
stackOps = do 
    !x <- pop
    push 42
    return x
($!) :: (a -> b) -> a -> b                 -- a strict function application
f $! x = let !vx = x in f vx

($!!) :: (NFData a) => (a -> b) -> a -> b  -- the strictest function application
f $!! x = x `deepseq` f x
randomSum :: Int -> IO Int
randomSum n = do 
    randList <- replicateM n $ randomRIO (0, 10)
    return $! sum randList
f1 !(x,y) = [x,y]
f2 (x,y)  = [x,y] -- how do f1 and f2 differ?
g (!x, y) = [x,y]
let (!x,[y]) = e in b

Lazy pattern matches

f :: (a, b) -> Int
f  (a, b) = const 1 a -- this pair pattern is too strict

g :: (a, b) -> Int
g ~(a, b) = const 1 a -- lazy pattern match
ghci> f undefined
*** Exception: Prelude.undefined

ghci> g undefined
1
lazyHead :: [a] -> a
lazyHead ~[]    = undefined
lazyHead ~(x:_) = x
f1 :: Either e Int -> Int
f1 ~(Right 1) = 42

ghci > f1 (Left "the hehes")
42
ghci > f1 (error "and the hahas")
42

Strict Haskell

data Config = Config
    { users ::  Int
    , extra ::  Maybe Settings
    } deriving (Show)
data Config = Config  -- with strict fields
    { users :: !Int
    , extra :: !(Maybe Settings)  
    } deriving (Show)
data Config = Config
    { users :: Int
    , extra :: Maybe Settings  
    } deriving (Show)
{-# LANGUAGE StrictData #-}

Also since GHC 8

{-# LANGUAGE Strict #-}  -- but it's used ultra-rarely

Makes everything strict by default

Strict fields help avoid space leaks

Using them can decrease memory consumption of the program

When to use strict evaluation?

1. When your program runs slow or crashes with StackOverflow: strict evaluation could help.

2. Arithmetic operations (+, *, square, etc.)

3. Reduce the growth of calling functions (or in the case of recursion):

f x = g $! (h x)

f x = g x -- no strict application, all is ok

f !x = g (h x) -- f is strict by argument, no need to call $!

    not a necessary rule but it could be helpful

4. Fields of data types (to avoid space leaks)

Did someone say space leaks?

bad :: [Double] -> (Double, Int)
bad xs = (Prelude.sum xs, Prelude.length xs)  -- an unavoidable space leak here
import qualified Control.Foldl as L

good :: [Double] -> (Double, Int)
good xs = L.fold ((,) <$> L.sum <*> L.length) xs

Using Gabriella Gonzalez's foldl library 

ghci> let average = (/) <$> L.sum <*> L.length
ghci> L.fold average [1..10]
5.5

And it becomes even better

import Data.List (foldl')

bad2 :: Num a => [a] -> (a, Int)
bad2 xs = foldl' step (0, 0) xs
  where
    step (x, y) n = (x + n, y + 1)

Scary pictures

Normal work

Typical space leak

Deforestation

Examples

map f     . map g = map (f . g)     -- we want one traversal
sum        (map (^2) [1 .. n])      -- essentially a loop w/ an intermediate list 
filter p  . map f = ??              -- should work for infinite lists
foldr f z . map g = foldr (f . g) z -- «Fusion Property»
map :: (a -> b) -> [a] -> [b]
map _ []     = []
map f (x:xs) = f x : map f xs

-- equivalent form
map :: (a -> b) -> [a] -> [b]
map f l = case l of
               []     -> []
               (x:xs) -> f x : map f xs

Let's rewrite 'map' to prepare for deforestation

Deforestation example

func = foldr (+) 0 . map (\x -> x * 10) -- our input
-- step 0: unfold the definition of composition w/ eta-expansion
func l = foldr (+) 0 (map (\x -> x * 10) l)
-- step 1: inline the body of foldr
func l = case (map (\x -> x * 10) l) of [] -> 0
                                        (x:xs) -> x + (foldr (+) 0 xs)  
-- step 2: inline the body of map, unfold the lambda
func l = case (case l of [] -> []
                         (y:ys) -> y * 10 : map (\x -> x * 10) ys) of
              [] -> 0
              (x:xs) -> x + (foldr (+) 0 xs)  
-- step 3: apply the case-of-case transformation
func l = case l of [] -> (case [] of [] -> 0
                                     (x:xs) -> x + (foldr (+) 0 xs))
                   (y:ys) -> (case (y * 10 : map (\x -> x * 10) ys) of
                                   [] -> 0
                                   (x:xs) -> x + (foldr (+) 0 xs)) 
-- step 4: unfold the inner cases by analyzing the constructors
func l = case l of [] -> 0
                   (y:ys) -> y * 10 + (foldr (+) 0 (map (\x -> x * 10) ys))
-- step 5: replace the last call with the recursive call
func l = case l of [] -> 0
                   (y:ys) -> y * 10 + func ys

Stream Fusion

From lists to streams

newtype List a = List ([a] -> Maybe (a, [a]))

I. Naive streams

Let's implement map1

map1 :: (a -> b) -> List a -> List b
map1 g (List f) = List h
  where
    h s' = case f s' of
      Nothing       -> Nothing
      Just (x, s'') -> Just (g x, s'')

But it doesn't type check

Couldn't match type a with b

g x :: b
s'' :: [a]
g x :: b
s'' :: [a]

From lists to streams

newtype List a b = List ([a] -> Maybe (b, [a]))  -- typechecks, but ugly

II. Less naive streams

data List a b = List ([a] -> Maybe (b, [a])) [a] -- the penultimate version

III. List streams

data Step s a = Done 
              | Skip    s 
              | Yield a s

data Stream a = forall s . Stream (s -> Step s a) s

IV. Stream fusion

Stream Fusion

stream :: forall a . [a] -> Stream a
stream xs = Stream next xs 
  where
    next :: [a] -> Step [a] a
    next []     = Done
    next (x:xs) = Yield x xs
data Step s a = Done 
              | Skip    s 
              | Yield a s

data Stream a = forall s . Stream (s -> Step s a) s
                                     ││           │
                                     ││           └── the stream itself
                                     ││
                                     └┴── the stream extractor
unstream :: forall a . Stream a -> [a]
unstream (Stream next s0) = go s0 
  where
    go s = case next s of 
             Done       -> []
             Skip s'    -> go s'
             Yield a s' -> a : go s'
mapS :: forall a b . (a -> b) -> Stream a -> Stream b
mapS f (Stream next s) = Stream next' s 
  where
    next' xs = case next xs of 
                    Done       -> Done
                    Skip s'    -> Skip s'
                    Yield a s' -> Yield (f a) s'
filterS :: forall a . (a -> Bool) -> Stream a -> Stream a
filterS p (Stream next s) = Stream next' s 
  where
    next' xs = case next xs of 
                    Done       -> Done
                    Skip s'    -> Skip s'
                    Yield a s' -> if p a then Yield a s' else Skip s'

Simple stream fusion functions

foldrS left as an exercise

map :: (a -> b) -> [a] -> [b]
map f = unstream . mapS f . stream

Stream fusion optimization

filter :: (a -> Bool) -> [a] -> [a]
filter p = unstream . filterS p . stream
foo ≡            map  show          .            filter  even
    ≡            map  show          . unstream . filterS even . stream
    ≡ unstream . mapS show . stream . unstream . filterS even . stream
                               │          │
                               └────┬─────┘
                                    │
                         nuked by a rewrite rule
{-# RULES "stream/unstream" 
    forall (s :: Stream a) . stream (unstream s) = s 
  #-}

What on earth is a rewrite rule?

Hackage: stream-fusion — stream fusion for lists

Github: bytestring — stream fusion for ByteString

Sequences: Stream fusion ≫= Rewrite Rules ≫= Deforestation

Mutable Objects

Mutable Objects

import Data.Array.IO

arrayOps :: IO Int
arrayOps = do 
    arr <- newArray (0, 100) 42 :: IO (IOArray Int Int)
    a   <- readArray arr 1
    writeArray arr 2 (64 + a)
    readArray arr 2

What is the problem with an IO array?

-- import Control.Monad.ST
data ST s a  -- The strict ST monad providing support for strict state "threads"

Pure mutable objects

runState :: State s a -> s -> (a, s)  -- use evalState to get the result
runST    :: (forall s. ST s a) -> a   -- the forall trick
data STRef s a  -- a mutable variable

newSTRef    :: a -> ST s (STRef s a) 
readSTRef   :: STRef s a -> ST s a
writeSTRef  :: STRef s a -> a -> ST s ()
modifySTRef :: STRef s a -> (a -> a) -> ST s () 
import Control.Monad.ST
import Data.STRef
import Data.Foldable

sumST :: Num a => [a] -> a
sumST xs = runST $ do
    n <- newSTRef 0
    for_ xs $ \x ->
        modifySTRef n (+x)
    readSTRef n

Imperative Haskell: Haskell quicksort on mutable arrays

-- import Data.Array.ST
data STArray s i e :: * -> * -> * -> *  -- Mutable, boxed, non-strict arrays
-- s: the state variable argument for the ST type
-- i: the index type of the array (should be an instance of Ix), usually Int
-- e: the element type of the array.

Mutable arrays

newArray   :: Ix i => (i, i) -> e -> m (a i e)
readArray  :: (MArray a e m, Ix i) => a i e -> i -> m e
writeArray :: (MArray a e m, Ix i) => a i e -> i -> e -> m ()
class Monad m => MArray a e m where  -- type class for all arrays
data STUArray s i e  -- A mutable array with unboxed elements 
                     -- (Int, Double, Bool, etc.)
                     -- Has support of a very exclusive set of the element types!

Mutable dynamic arrays

data Vector    a  -- immutable vectors
data MVector s a  -- mutable vectors
-- immutable vectors
(!) :: Vector a -> Int -> a  -- O(1) indexing
fromList :: [a] -> Vector a
map, filter, etc. 
-- mutable vectors
read   :: (PrimMonad m, MVector v a) => v (PrimState m) a -> Int -> m a
write  :: (PrimMonad m, MVector v a) => v (PrimState m) a -> Int -> a -> m ()
grow   :: PrimMonad m => MVector (PrimState m) a -> Int -> m (MVector (PrimState m) a)
freeze :: PrimMonad m => MVector (PrimState m) a -> m (Vector a)
-- holy types O_O

Compare immutable and mutable implementations

module ListInsertionSort where

-- span (> 3) [4,5,4,1,4,7] == ([4,5,4],[1,4,7])
sort :: [Int] -> [Int]  -- list sort
sort = insS []
  where
    insS sl []     = sl
    insS sl (x:xs) = let (lower, greater) = span (< x) sl
                     in insS (lower ++ (x : greater)) xs

Mutable STUArray implementation

module ArrayInsertionSort where

import Control.Monad.ST
import Data.Array.ST
import Data.Foldable (forM_)
import Control.Monad (unless)

type IntArray s = STUArray s Int Int

sort :: [Int] -> [Int]  -- sort on mutable arrays
sort list = runST $ do
    let listSize = length list
    arr <- newListArray (0, listSize - 1) list :: ST s (IntArray s)

    forM_ [1..listSize - 1] $ \i ->
        forM_ [i-1, i-2..0] $ \j -> do
            cur  <- readArray arr j
            next <- readArray arr (j + 1)
            unless (cur <= next) $ do writeArray arr j next
                                      writeArray arr (j + 1) cur

    getElems arr

Mutable MVector implementation

{-# LANGUAGE FlexibleContexts #-}
module VecInsertionSort where

import           Control.Monad.ST
import           Data.Foldable (forM_)
import           Control.Monad (unless)
import qualified Data.Vector.Unboxed         as V
import qualified Data.Vector.Unboxed.Mutable as M

sort :: [Int] -> [Int]  -- sort on mutable arrays
sort list = runST $ do
    let listSize = length list
    vec <- V.thaw $ V.fromList list :: ST s (M.MVector s Int)

    forM_ [1..listSize - 1] $ \i -> do
        let jScan j
                | j >= 0 = do
                    cur  <- M.read vec j
                    next <- M.read vec (j + 1)
                    unless (cur <= next) $ do M.swap vec j (j + 1)
                                              jScan (j - 1)
                | otherwise = return ()
        jScan (i - 1)

    resVec <- V.freeze vec
    return $ V.toList resVec

How to measure time?

ghci> :set +s

Deeper understanding

Lecture 08: Speeding up Haskell

By ITMO CTD Haskell

Lecture 08: Speeding up Haskell

Lecture about list concatenation precedence, DList, foldr vs. foldl, normal forms, seq and deepseq, deforestation, stream fusion and pure mutable arrays.

  • 5,808