Functional programming-advantages

What did functional programming ever do for us
(software engineers)?
An extreme pragmatic and un-academic approach
Sergei Winitzki
Academy by the Bay
2020-08-22
Sergei Winitzki (ABTB) Why functional programming 2020-08-22 1 / 18

Overview: Advantages of functional programming
Features of functional programming are being added to many languages
What are these features?
What advantages do they give programmers?
Programmer-facing features listed in the increasing order of complexity
(and decreasing order of advantage-to-cost ratio)
1 Write iterative code without loops
2 Use functions parameterized by types, checked by compiler
3 Use disjunctive types to model special cases, errors, etc.
4 Use special syntax for chaining eﬀectful computations

Feature 1: Loop-free iterative programs. Transformation
An easy interview question:
Given an array of integers, ﬁnd all pairs that sum to a given number
Solutions using loops: 10-20 lines of code
FP solution with O(n2) complexity:
# Python
[ (x, y) for x in array for y in array if x + y == n ]
// Scala
for { x <- array; y <- array; if x + y == n } yield (x, y)
-- Haskell
do; x <- array; y <- array; guard (x + y == n); return (x, y)
FP solution with O(n log n) complexity:
// Scala
val hash = array.toSet
for { x <- hash; if hash contains (n - x) } yield (x, n - x)

Feature 1: Loop-free iterative programs. Aggregation
Given an array of integers, compute the sum of square roots of all
elements except negative ones
# Python
sum( [ sqrt(x) for x in givenArray if x >= 0 ] )
// Scala
givenArray.filter(_ >= 0).map(math.sqrt).sum
Given a set of integers, compute the sum of those integers which are
non-negative and whose square root is also present in the set
Solution using loops: 15-20 lines of code
FP solution:
givenSet // Scala
.filter { x => x >= 0 && givenSet.contains(math.sqrt(x)) }
.sum
Compute a positive integer from a given array of its decimal digits
digits.reverse.zipWithIndex // Scala
.map { case (d, i) => d * math.pow(10, i).toInt } .sum

Feature 1: Loop-free iterative programs. Induction
Compute the mean value of a given sequence in single pass
scala> Seq(4, 5, 6, 7).foldLeft((0.0, 0.0)) {
| case ((sum, count), x) => (sum + x, count + 1)
| }.pipe { case (sum, count) => sum / count }
res1: Double = 5.5
Any inductive deﬁnition can be converted to a “fold”
Base case is the initial value
Inductive step is the updater function

Feature 1: Loop-free iterative programs. Other applications
The implementation of map, filter, fold, flatMap, groupBy, sum, etc.,
may be asynchronous (Akka Streams), parallel, and/or distributed
(Spark, Flink)
The programmer writes loop-free code in the map/filter/reduce style
The runtime engine implements parallelism, fault tolerance, etc.
Many types of programmer errors are avoided automatically
What we need to support programming in the map/filter/reduce style:
Collections with user-definable methods
Functions (“lambdas”) passed as parameters to other functions
Easy work with tuple types
Lambdas were added to most programming languages by 2015

Feature 2: Type parameters. Usage
Collections can have types parameterized by element type
Array of integers: Array[Int]
Array of strings: Array[String]
Array of arrays of pairs of integers and strings: Array[Array[(Int,
String)]]
Methods such as map, zip, flatMap, groupBy change the type parameters
Seq(4, 5, 6, 7) // Seq[Int]
.zip(Seq("a", "b", "c", "d")) // Seq[(Int, String)]
.map { case (i, s) => s"$s : $i" } // Seq[String]
The compiler prevents using incorrect type parameters anywhere

Feature 2: Type parameters. Language features
Code can be written once, then used with diﬀerent type parameters
Example (Scala):
def map[A, B](xs: Seq[A])(f: A => B): Seq[B] = ...
Collections (Array, Set, etc.) with type parameters support such
methods
Many programming languages have type parameters
Functions with type parameters were added to Java in 2006
C++ can imitate this functionality with templates
Go-lang might get type parameters in the future

Feature 3: Disjunctive types
Enumeration type (enum) describes a set of disjoint possibilities:
enum Color { RED, GREEN, BLUE; } // Java
A value of type Color can be only one of the three possibilities
Disjunctive types are “enriched” enum types, carrying extra values:
// Scala 3
enum RootOfEq { case NoRoots(); case OneRoot(x: Float); }
The switch is “enriched” to extract data from disjunctive values
// Scala
roots match {
case OneRoot(x) => // May use ‘x‘ in this expression.
case NoRoots() => // May not use ‘x‘ here by mistake.
}
Disjunctive types describe values from “tagged union” sets
OneRoot(x) ∼= the set of all Float values
NoRoots() ∼= the set consisting of a single value
RootOfEq ∼= either some Float value or the special value NoRoots()

Feature 3: Disjunctive types. Adoption in languages
Disjunctive types and pattern matching are required for FP
Introduced in Standard ML (1973)
Supported in all FP languages (OCaml, Haskell, F#, Scala, Swift, ...)
The support of disjunctive types only comes in FP-designed languages
Not supported in C, C++, Java, JavaScript, Python, Go, ...
Not supported in relational languages (Prolog, SQL, Datalog, ...)
Not supported in conﬁguration data formats (XML, JSON, YAML, ...)
Logical completeness of the type system:
Scala type Logic operation Logic notation Type notation
(A, B) conjunction A ∧ B A × B
Either[A, B] disjunction A ∨ B A + B
A => B implication A ⇒ B A → B
Unit true 1
Nothing false ⊥ 0
Programming is easier in languages having a complete logic of types
“Hindley-Milner type system”

Feature 4: Chaining of eﬀects. Motivation
How to compose computations that may fail with an error?
A “result or error” disjunctive type: Try[A] ∼= Either[Throwable, A]
In Scala, Try[A] is a disjunction of Failure[Throwable] and Success[A]
Working with Try[A] requires two often-used code patterns:
Use Try[A] in a computation that cannot fail, f: A => B
Success(a) goes to Success(f(a)) but Failure(t) remains unchanged
Use Try[A] in a computation that can fail, g: A => Try[B]
Success(a) goes to g(a) while Failure(t) remains unchanged

Feature 4: Chaining of eﬀects. Implementation
Implementing the two code patterns using pattern matching:
Pattern 1: use Try[A] in a computation that cannot fail
tryGetFileStats() match {
case Success(stats) => Success(stats.getTimestamp)
case Failure(exception) => Failure(exception)
}
Pattern 2: use Try[A] in a computation that can fail
tryOpenFile() match {
case Success(file) => tryRead(file) // Returns Try[Array[Byte]]
}

Feature 4: Chaining of eﬀects. Implementation
The two patterns may be combined at will
// Read a file, decode UTF-8, return the number of chars.
def utfChars(name: String): Try[Int] = tryOpenFile(name) match {
case Success(file) => tryRead(file) match {
case Success(bytes) => tryDecodeUTF8(bytes) match {
case Success(decoded) => Success(decoded.length)
}
}
}
The code is awkwardly nested and repetitive
This sort of code is common in go-lang programs:
err1, res1 := tryOpenFile();
if (res1 != nil) {
err2, res2 := tryRead(res1);
if (res2 != nil) { ... } // Continue with no errors.
else ... // Handle second error.
else ... // Handle first error.

Feature 4: Chaining of eﬀects. Using map and flatMap
Implement the two code patterns using map and flatMap:
Try(a).map(f) – use with f: A => B that cannot fail
Try(a).flatMap(g) – use with g: A => Try[B] that can fail
def fmap[A, B](f: A => B): Try[A] => Try[B]
def flm[A, B](g: A => Try[B]): Try[A] => Try[B]
Pattern 1: use Try[A] in a computation that cannot fail
tryGetFileStats() match {
case Success(stats) => Success(stats.getTimestamp)
}
Pattern 2: use Try[A] in a computation that can fail
tryOpenFile() match {
case Success(file) => read(file) // Returns Try[InputStream]
}

Feature 4: Chaining of eﬀects. Special syntax
Using map and flatMap, the code from the previous slide simpliﬁes:
tryGetFileStats().map(stats => stats.getTimestamp)
tryOpenFile().flatMap(file => read(file))
We can now write code like this (avoiding nesting and repetition):
Try(one()).map { x => f(x) }.flatMap { y => Try(another(y)) }
Instead of a chain of map and flatMap methods, use a special syntax:
for {
x <- Try(one())
y = f(x)
z <- Try(another(y))
} yield z
Resembles the syntax for nested loops (“for-comprehension”)
for { x <- list1; y <- list2 } yield p(x, y) // Scala
[ p(x, y) for y in list2 for x in list1 ] // Python
In Haskell: “do notation”, in F#: “computation expressions”

Feature 4: Chaining of eﬀects. Special syntax
Using the special syntax, a chain of computations looks like this:
// Read a file, decode UTF-8, return the number of chars.
def utfChars(name: String): Try[Int] = for {
file <- tryOpenFile(name)
bytes <- tryRead(file)
decoded <- tryDecodeUTF8(bytes)
length = decoded.length
} yield length

Features 1-4 may be combined at will
The main advantages in practical coding come from combining features 1-4
of functional programming
Use functional methods on collections with type parameters
Use disjunctive types to represent program requirements
Avoid explicit loops and make sure all types match
Compose programs at high level by chaining eﬀects (Try, Future, ...)

Summary
FP proposes 4 essential features that make programming easier
loop-free iteration, type parameters, disjunctive types, chaining syntax
other, more advanced features have lower cost/advantage ratios
All “FP languages” have these features and give the same advantages
OCaml, Haskell, Scala, F#, Swift, Rust, Elm, ...
Most “non-FP languages” lack at least 2 of these features
Lack of features may be compensated but raises the cost of their use

Functional programming-advantages

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot (13)

Similar to Functional programming-advantages (20)

Recently uploaded (20)

Functional programming-advantages