wtfunctional/tex/wtfunctional.tex

146 lines
4 KiB
TeX
Raw Normal View History

\documentclass[english]{beamer}
\usepackage{babel}
\usepackage{csquotes}
\usepackage{tabularx}
\usepackage{fontspec}
\setsansfont{Fira Sans}
\setmonofont{Inconsolata-g}
\usetheme{Antibes}
%\usecolortheme{beaver}
\setbeamercovered{transparent}
\title{WTFunctional}
\author{Oliver Rümpelein}
\subtitle{Using functional structures in non-functional languages}
\input{headers/listings}
\begin{document}
\frame{\titlepage}
\section{Dafunc?}
\subsection{Functional programming}
\begin{frame}{Understanding functional paradigms}
Here: so called \enquote{purely functional} paradigm.
\begin{itemize}
\item<+-> Programming without \enquote{side-effects}
\begin{itemize}
\item<+-> No mutability
\item<+-> Functions work only in local context
\end{itemize}
\item<+-> Extensive use of lists and so called maps/reduces (later)
\item<+-> Do not mix up with \enquote{procedural} programming (using only functions)!
\end{itemize}
\end{frame}
\begin{frame}[fragile]{Example}
%ToDo: C-code call by value, call by reference.
\begin{cppcode}
int f(int x) { return ++x;}
int g(int& x) { return ++x;}
int main() {
int x = 2;
f(x);
assert(x==2); // f is “functional”
g(x);
assert(x!=2); // g is not!
}
\end{cppcode}
\end{frame}
\begin{frame}{Pros and Cons}
Pros:
\begin{itemize}[<+->]
\item Maintainability
\item Testing
\item (often) shorter code
\end{itemize}
Cons:
\begin{itemize}[<+->]
\item harder to learn
\item harder to understand
\item slower due to abstraction
\end{itemize}
\end{frame}
\subsection{Case study: Haskell}
\begin{frame}{Overview}
\begin{itemize}[<+->]
\item \emph{Haskell} is a purely functional, compiled programming language
developed since 1990.
\item It is typed and has a strong meta-type system (comparable to
interfaces in OOP)
\item The most important implementation is \emph{GHC} (Glasgow Haskell
Compiler)
\item Haskell is lazy. Statements get evaluated only when needed, if ever.
\end{itemize}
\end{frame}
\begin{frame}[fragile]{Syntax Functions}
Function constraints, definition and calls:
\begin{haskell}
mysum :: Num a => a -> a -> a -> a
mysum x y z = x + y + z
-- b == 6
b = mysum 1 2 3
\end{haskell}
\pause
Functions always get evaluated left to right, thus the following works (\emph{Currying}):
\begin{haskell}
mysum2 = mysum 2
-- c == 12
c = mysum2 4 6
\end{haskell}
\end{frame}
\begin{frame}[fragile]{Syntax Lists (1)}
Lists in Haskell can only hold data of one type. They are defined using
\haskellcmd{a = [1,2,3,4]} or similar.
\pause
Furthermore, an automatic range can be obtained by using
\haskellcmd{b = [1..4]}, where the last number is inclusive.
\pause
If possible, Haskell will try to inhibit the step automatically
\haskellcmd{c = [1,3..7]} yields \haskellcmd{[1,3,5,7]}.
\pause
When leaving out the end specifier, a range can be infinite. In this case,
it's up to the programmer to constrain things.
\end{frame}
\begin{frame}[fragile]{Syntax Lists (2)}
Two arrays can be concatenated using the \haskellcmd{++} operator
\haskellcmd{[1,2,3] ++ [4..7]}
Single objects get pushed to the front using \haskellcmd{:}:
\haskellcmd{1:[2..7]}.
This can also be used vice versa to extract single values from lists
\begin{haskell}
extract (x:xs) = x
-- a = 1
a = extract [1..5]
\end{haskell}
\end{frame}
\begin{frame}[fragile]{Syntax Recursion}
Example: Add a value to every entry in an array
\begin{haskell}
addto :: (Num a) => [a] -> a -> [a]
addto [] _ = [] -- edge case (list empty)
addto (x:xs) y = (x+y) : addto xs y
b = [1..4]
-- c == [5,6,7,8]
c = addto b 4
\end{haskell}
\end{frame}
\end{document}
%%% Local Variables:
%%% mode: latex
%%% End: