views:

159

answers:

2

In an effort to understand the capabilities of functional programming I put together a few basic functions that you can compose together to build complex regular expressions. Now after some testing I have found this works but you can write some horrible code in any language that will work. Is this the kind of code you would find a professional F# programmer writing or am I abusing the feature?

Note: test is specifically what I am referring to.

type State = { input:string; index:int; succeeded:bool }
type Matcher = State -> State

let term (cs:char Set)  =
    fun s ->
        if s.succeeded && s.index < s.input.Length && cs.Contains s.input.[s.index] then  
            { input = s.input; index = s.index + 1; succeeded = true }
        else 
            { input = s.input; index = s.index; succeeded = false }

let quantify (term, min, max) =
    let rec inner (s:State, count) =
        if s.succeeded && s.index < s.input.Length && count <= max then
            inner (term { input = s.input; index = s.index + 1; succeeded = true }, count + 1) 
        elif count >= min && count <= max then
            { input = s.input; index = s.index - 1; succeeded = true }    
        else 
            s         
    fun s -> inner (s, 0) 

let disjunction leftTerm rightTerm =
    fun s ->
        let left = leftTerm s
        if not left.succeeded then
            let right = rightTerm s  
            if not right.succeeded then
                { input = s.input; index = s.index; succeeded = false }
            else
                right
        else
            left 

let matcher input terms =
    let r = terms  { input = input; index = 0; succeeded = true } 
    if r.succeeded then r.input.Substring (0, r.index) else null

let test = // (abc|xyz)a{2,3}bc
    disjunction // (abc|xyz)
        (term (set "a") >> term (set "b") >> term (set "c"))
        (term (set "x") >> term (set "y") >> term (set "z"))  
    >> quantify (term (set "a"), 2, 3) // (a{2,3})
    >> term (set "b") // b  
    >> term (set "c") // c

let main () : unit =
    printfn "%s" (matcher "xyzaabc" test)
    System.Console.ReadKey true |> ignore

main()
+8  A: 

The code looks pretty good to me.

I'm not sure if this was your intention or a coincidence, but you're implementing something quite similar to "parser combinators", which is a topic of many academic papers :-). I think that Monadic Parser Combinators is quite readable (it has examples in Haskell, but you should be able to translate them to F#).

Regarding the function composition operator. I'm generally not a big fan of using the operator too much, because it often obfuscates the code. However, in your example it makes a good sense because you can easily imagine that >> means "this group should be followed by that group", which is easy to interpret.

The only minor change that I would do is to choose some nice custom operator for the disjunction operation and define a few more primitive operations, so that you can write for example this:

// Test against several terms in sequence
let sequence terms = (fun state -> terms |> Seq.fold (>>) state)
// Test for a substring
let substring s = sequence [ for c in s -> term (set [c]) ]

let test = // (abc|xyz)a{2,3}bc 
  ( substring "abc" <|> substring "xyz" )
  >> quantify 2 3 (term (set "a")) // (a{2,3}) 
  >> substring "bc" // bc

This is more higher-level description, so it removes some of the >> operators in favor of functions that are more descriptive (and encapsulate >>). I also changed quantify to take multiple arguments instead of a tripple (which is a minor change)

If you want to play with this further, then you can take a look at the article and try to write F# computation expression builder that would allow you to use parser { .. } syntax.

Tomas Petricek
It is good to know I am making progress in my functional programming skills. You've got me really excited to try and wrap with all into the elegant computational expression syntax. :) Anyway thanks for your advice and the paper *(I am a fan of anything Erik Meijer.)*.
ChaosPandion
Interesting paper; thanks for posting the link.
TechNeilogy
+3  A: 

This is generally good style but you're missing some tricks and still have quite a bit of redundancy. Maybe more like this:

let valid (s: State) = s.succeeded && s.index < s.input.Length
...
let disjunction leftTerm rightTerm s =
  let left = leftTerm s
  if left.succeeded then left else
    let right = rightTerm s  
    if right.succeeded then right else
      { s with succeeded = false }
...
let test =
  let f s = set s |> term
  let (++) s t = f s >> f t
  disjunction ("a" ++ "b" ++ "c") ("x" ++ "y" ++ "z")  
  >> quantify (f "a", 2, 3)
  >> "b" ++ "c"

You might prefer to accumulate a value representing a computation rather than closures because it makes debugging much easier.

Jon Harrop
Wow I feel kind of dumb for not coming up with that `valid` function. Thanks for your suggestions.
ChaosPandion