此问题中 myAny函数的代码使用foldr.当谓词满足时,它会停止处理无限列表.
我用foldl重写了它:
myAny :: (a -> Bool) -> [a] -> Bool
myAny p list = foldl step False list
where
step acc item = p item || accRun Code Online (Sandbox Code Playgroud)
(请注意,步骤函数的参数已正确反转.)
但是,它不再停止处理无限列表.
我试图在Apocalisp的答案中跟踪函数的执行情况:
myAny even [1..]
foldl step False [1..]
step (foldl step False [2..]) 1
even 1 || (foldl step False [2..])
False || (foldl step False [2..])
foldl step False [2..]
step (foldl step False [3..]) 2
even 2 || (foldl step False [3..])
True || (foldl …Run Code Online (Sandbox Code Playgroud) 我想测试foldl vs foldr.从我所看到的,你应该使用foldl over foldr,因为尾部递归优化.
这是有道理的.但是,运行此测试后,我很困惑:
foldr(使用时间命令时需要0.057秒):
a::a -> [a] -> [a]
a x = ([x] ++ )
main = putStrLn(show ( sum (foldr a [] [0.. 100000])))
Run Code Online (Sandbox Code Playgroud)
foldl(使用time命令时需要0.089s):
b::[b] -> b -> [b]
b xs = ( ++ xs). (\y->[y])
main = putStrLn(show ( sum (foldl b [] [0.. 100000])))
Run Code Online (Sandbox Code Playgroud)
很明显,这个例子很简单,但我很困惑为什么foldr击败foldl.这不应该是foldl获胜的明显案例吗?