I\'m new to Haskell, and I\'m trying a bit:
isPrime :: Integer->Bool
isPrime x = ([] == [y | y<-[2..floor (sqrt x)], mod x y == 0])
I
Landei's solution is great, however, if you want a more efficient¹ implementation we have (thanks to BMeph):
-- list of all primes
primes :: [Integer]
primes = sieve (2 : 3 : possible [1..]) where
sieve (p : xs) = p : sieve [x | x <- xs, x `mod` p > 0]
possible (x:xs) = 6*x-1 : 6*x+1 : possible xs
isPrime :: Integer -> Bool
isPrime n = shortCircuit || (not $ any divisible $ takeWhile inRangeOf primes) where
shortCircuit = elem n [2,3] || (n < 25 && ((n-1) `mod` 6 == 0 || (n+1) `mod` 6 == 0))
divisible y = n `mod` y == 0
inRangeOf y = y * y <= n
The 'efficiency' comes from the use of constant primes. It improves the search in two ways:
sieve
value is simply a recursive table, where says the head of
the list is prime, and adds it to it. For the rest of the lists if there is no
other value already in the list that composes the number then its also prime
possible
is list of all possible primes, since all possible primes are in the
form 6*k-1 or 6*k-1 except 2 and 3
The same rule is applied for shortCircuit
too to quickly bail out of calculationsFootnote by D.F.
¹ It's still a terribly inefficient way to find primes. Don't use trial division if you need primes larger than a few thousand, use a sieve instead. There are several far more efficient implementations on hackage.
Because sqrt
has the type Floating a => a -> a
. This means the input has to be a Floating
type and the output will be the same type. In other words x
needs to be a Floating
type. However you declared x
to be of type Integer
, which is not a Floating
type. In addition floor
needs a RealFrac
type, so x
needs to be that as well.
The error message suggests that you fix that by making Integer
a Floating
type (by defining an instance Floating Integer
(and the same for RealFrac
).
Of course this is not the correct approach in this case. Rather you should use fromIntegral
to convert x
to a Real
(which is an instance of Floating
and RealFrac
) and then give that to sqrt
.
Yes. As soon as ==
sees that the right operand has at least one element, it knows it is not equal to []
and thus returns False
.
That being said, null
is a more idiomatic way to check whether a list is empty than [] ==
.
Regarding the second point, it stops, for example:
[] == [x | x <- [1..]]
Returns False
isPrime 32
then it will lazily compute the expression.PS your isPrime implementation is not the best implementation!
1) The problem is that sqrt
has the type (Floating a) => a -> a
, but you try to use an Integer as argument. So you have to convert your Integer first to a Floating, e.g. by writing sqrt (fromIntegral x)
2) I see no reason why == shouldn't be lazy, but for testing for an empty collection you can use the null
function (which is definitely lazy, as it works on infinite lists):
isPrime :: Integer->Bool
isPrime x = null [y | y<-[2..floor (sqrt (fromIntegral x))], x `mod` y == 0]
But in order to get an more idiomatic solution, break the problem into smaller sub-problems. First, we need a list of all elements y with y*y <= x:
takeWhile (\y -> y*y <= x) [2..]
Then we need only the elements that divide x:
filter (\y -> x `mod`y == 0) (takeWhile (\y -> y*y <= x) [2..])
Then we need to check if that list is empty:
isPrime x = null (filter (\y -> x `mod`y == 0) (takeWhile (\y -> y*y <= x) [2..]))
And if this looks to lispy to you, replace some of the parens with $
isPrime x = null $ filter (\y -> x `mod` y == 0) $ takeWhile (\y -> y*y <= x) [2..]
For additional clarity you can "outsource" the lambdas:
isPrime x = null $ filter divisible $ takeWhile notTooBig [2..] where
divisible y = x `mod`y == 0
notTooBig y = y*y <= x
You can make it almost "human readable" by replacing null $ filter with not $ any:
isPrime x = not $ any divisible $ takeWhile notTooBig [2..] where
divisible y = x `mod`y == 0
notTooBig y = y*y <= x