Browse thread
[NEWBIE] is there an in-place map?
[
Home
]
[ Index:
by date
|
by threads
]
[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
| Date: | -- (:) |
| From: | Brian Hurt <bhurt@j...> |
| Subject: | Re: [Caml-list] [NEWBIE] is there an in-place map? |
Jean-Christophe Filliâtre wrote:
>Kuba Ober a écrit :
>
>
>>I need functionality of map, but done in such a way that the output array
>>is given as the argument, not as a return value. The closest I could get was
>>
>>let inplace_map f a b = Array.blit (map f a) 0 b 0 (Array.length a)
>>
>>Arrays a and b are of the same size.
>>This seems very inelegant.
>>
>>
>
>I guess you mean Array.map. Indeed, this is not optimal because
>Array.map allocates a new array, whose contents is immediately copied
>into b.
>
>
>
There's a reason for that...
>>One could use an adapter function and iteri, but that adds very noticeable
>>overhead, and doesn't seem too elegant either.
>>
>>let inplace_map f a b = Array.iteri (fun i src -> b.(i) <- f src; ()) a
>>
>>
>
>You may find this inelegant too, but it is clearly more efficient than
>your previous version using map. Note that "; ()" can be omitted, since
>the assignment <- already has type unit.
>
>Equivalently, you could use a for loop instead of Array.iteri.
>
>
>
Both of these maps have the type ('a -> 'a) -> 'a array -> 'a array, as
opposed to the normal map, which has the type ('a -> 'b) -> 'a array ->
'b array. Once you allocate an array, you can't change the type it
holds. So I'd probably give the function some other name, maybe
"modify" or similiar.
Brian