Adapting foreign iterators to D ranges

Apr 22

Chloé

Apr 22

Alexandru Ermicioi

Apr 23

Steven Schveighoffer

Apr 23

Apr 24

Salih Dincer

Apr 25

Assume a third-party API of the following signature: T* next(I iter); which advances an iterator of sorts and returns the next element, or null when iteration is done. No other information about the state of the iterator is available. I wish to adapt this interface to a forward range for use with foreach and Phobos' range utilities. This amounts to implementing empty, front, and popFront, in terms of next and some state. But there is a choice to be made regarding the first call to next. One could call next during range construction: struct Range { private I iter; private T* current; this(I iter) { this.iter = iter; current = next(iter); } bool empty() const => current is null; inout(T)* front() inout => current; void popFront() { current = next(iter); } } Or do not call it until the first call to empty: struct Range { private bool initialized; private I iter; private T* current; this(I iter) { this.iter = iter; } bool empty() { if (!initialized) { current = next(iter); initialized = true; } return current is null; } inout(T)* front() inout => current; void popFront() { current = next(iter); } } The first implementation has the advantage is being simpler and empty being const, but has the downside that next is called even if the range ends up not being used. Is either approach used consistently across the D ecosystem?

On Monday, 22 April 2024 at 11:36:43 UTC, Chloé wrote: > The first implementation has the advantage is being simpler and empty being const, but has the downside that next is called even if the range ends up not being used. Is either approach used consistently across the D ecosystem? You can also place initialization logic inside front, then empty could become const. I don't think there is a preffered way of initializing such ranges, so imho consider what's best for your use case.

On Monday, 22 April 2024 at 11:36:43 UTC, Chloé wrote:

The first implementation has the advantage is being simpler and empty being const, but has the downside that next is called even if the range ends up not being used. Is either approach used consistently across the D ecosystem?

I always go for the simplest approach. So that means, pre-fill in the constructor.

Yes, the downside is, if you don't use it, then the iterator has moved, but the range hasn't. But returning to the iterator after using the range is always a dicey proposition anyway.

The huge benefit is that all the functions become simple and straightforward.

But there is no "right" approach. And using composition, you may be able to achieve all approaches with wrappers. Phobos does various things depending on what people thought was good at the time. It sometimes causes some very unexpected behavior.

I recommend always using the same approach for the same library, that way your users know what to expect!

-Steve

struct Range { private I iter; this(I iter) { this.iter = iter; } int opApply(scope int delegate(T* t) dg) { while (auto current = next(iter)) { if (auto r = dg(current)) return r; } return 0; } } void main() { I someIter; // = ... auto range = Range(someIter); foreach (const t; range) { writeln(*t); } }

April 24

Re: Adapting foreign iterators to D ranges

Posted by Salih Dincer
in reply to cc

Permalink

Salih Dincer

Posted in reply to cc

Permalink

On Tuesday, 23 April 2024 at 06:02:18 UTC, cc wrote:

Just to offer an alternative solution (since it sometimes gets overlooked), there is also the opApply approach. You don't get full forward range status, and checking whether it's empty essentially requires doing something like std.algorithm walkLength, but if all you need is basic iteration, it can be a simpler solution:

Yes, opApply() works! You just need to use do while() instead of while() because it skips the first item.

struct Node
{
  int item;
  Node* next;
}

class List
{
  Node* root, iter;

  this(int item = 0)
  {
    iter = new Node(item, null);
    root = iter;
  }

  List dup()
  {
    auto backup = new List();
    backup.root = root;
    backup.iter = iter;

    return backup;
  }

  void insertFront(T)(T item)
  {
    (*iter).next = new Node(item, null);
    this.Next;
  }

  bool empty() const => iter is null;
  auto front() inout => iter;
  auto popFront()    => iter = this.Next;
  auto getItem()     => iter.item;
  auto rewind()      => iter = root;
}

auto Next(List list) => list.iter = list.iter.next;
auto gaussian(T)(T n)=> (n * n + n) / 2;

void main()
{
  import std.stdio;
  enum LIMIT = 10;

  auto list = new List(1);
  foreach(t; 2 .. LIMIT + 1)
  {
    list.insertFront(t);
  }

  auto tmp = list.dup;
  list.rewind();

  size_t sum;
  do sum += list.getItem; while(list.Next);
  assert(gaussian(LIMIT) == sum);

  sum.writeln; // 55

  auto next = LIMIT + 1;
  tmp.insertFront(next);
  tmp.rewind();
  sum = 0;

  foreach(t; tmp) sum += t.item;
  assert(gaussian(LIMIT) + next == sum);

  sum.writeln; // 66
  tmp.rewind();

  auto range = Range(tmp);

  foreach(r; range) r.item.write(" ");
  writeln; //  2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
  // ? (1) --^
}

struct Range
{
  private List iter;

  int opApply(scope int delegate(Node* t) dg)
  {
    while(auto current = iter.Next)
    {
      if (auto r = dg(current))
        return r;
    }
    return 0;
  }
}

SDB@79

Forums