I\'m trying to understand what the dot operator is doing in this Haskell code:
sumEuler = sum . (map euler) . mkList
The entire source code
sum
is a function in the Haskell Prelude, not an argument to sumEuler
. It has the type
Num a => [a] -> a
The function composition operator .
has type
(b -> c) -> (a -> b) -> a -> c
So we have
euler :: Int -> Int
map :: (a -> b ) -> [a ] -> [b ]
(map euler) :: [Int] -> [Int]
mkList :: Int -> [Int]
(map euler) . mkList :: Int -> [Int]
sum :: Num a => [a ] -> a
sum . (map euler) . mkList :: Int -> Int
Note that Int
is indeed an instance of the Num
typeclass.
The . operator composes functions. For example,
a . b
Where a and b are functions is a new function that runs b on its arguments, then a on those results. Your code
sumEuler = sum . (map euler) . mkList
is exactly the same as:
sumEuler myArgument = sum (map euler (mkList myArgument))
but hopefully easier to read. The reason there are parens around map euler is because it makes it clearer that there are 3 functions being composed: sum, map euler and mkList - map euler is a single function.
Put simply, .
is function composition, just like in math:
f (g x) = (f . g) x
In your case, you are creating a new function, sumEuler
that could also be defined like this:
sumEuler x = sum (map euler (mkList x))
The style in your example is called "point-free" style -- the arguments to the function are omitted. This makes for clearer code in many cases. (It can be hard to grok the first time you see it, but you will get used to it after a while. It is a common Haskell idiom.)
If you are still confused, it may help to relate .
to something like a UNIX pipe. If f
's output becomes g
's input, whose output becomes h
's input, you'd write that on the command-line like f < x | g | h
. In Haskell, .
works like the UNIX |
, but "backwards" -- h . g . f $ x
. I find this notation to be quite helpful when, say, processing a list. Instead of some unwieldy construction like map (\x -> x * 2 + 10) [1..10]
, you could just write (+10) . (*2) <$> [1..10]
. (And, if you want to only apply that function to a single value; it's (+10) . (*2) $ 10
. Consistent!)
The Haskell wiki has a good article with some more detail: http://www.haskell.org/haskellwiki/Pointfree
The dot operator applies the function on the left (sum
) to the output of the function on the right. In your case, you're chaining several functions together - you're passing the result of mkList
to (map euler)
, and then passing the result of that to sum
.
This site has a good introduction to several of the concepts.
The . operator is used for function composition. Just like math, if you have to functions f(x) and g(x) f . g becomes f(g(x)).
map is a built-in function which applies a function to a list. By putting the function in parentheses the function is treated as an argument. A term for this is currying. You should look that up.
What is does is that it takes a function with say two arguments, it applies the argument euler. (map euler) right? and the result is a new function, which takes only one argument.
sum . (map euler) . mkList is basically a fancy way of putting all that together. I must say, my Haskell is a bit rusty but maybe you can put that last function together yourself?
Dot Operator in Haskell
I'm trying to understand what the dot operator is doing in this Haskell code:
sumEuler = sum . (map euler) . mkList
Equivalent code without dots, that is just
sumEuler = \x -> sum ((map euler) (mkList x))
or without the lambda
sumEuler x = sum ((map euler) (mkList x))
because the dot (.) indicates function composition.
First, let's simplify the partial application of euler
to map
:
map_euler = map euler
sumEuler = sum . map_euler . mkList
Now we just have the dots. What is indicated by these dots?
From the source:
(.) :: (b -> c) -> (a -> b) -> a -> c (.) f g = \x -> f (g x)
Thus (.)
is the compose operator.
In math, we might write the composition of functions, f(x) and g(x), that is, f(g(x)), as
(f ∘ g)(x)
which can be read "f composed with g".
So in Haskell, f ∘ g, or f composed with g, can be written:
f . g
Composition is associative, which means that f(g(h(x))), written with the composition operator, can leave out the parentheses without any ambiguity.
That is, since (f ∘ g) ∘ h is equivalent to f ∘ (g ∘ h), we can simply write f ∘ g ∘ h.
Circling back to our earlier simplification, this:
sumEuler = sum . map_euler . mkList
just means that sumEuler
is an unapplied composition of those functions:
sumEuler = \x -> sum (map_euler (mkList x))