Skip to main content

Oz: Translating Python into Oz

I've been working my way through Concepts, Techniques, and Models of Computer Programming. In chapter 3, one of the exercises was to transpose a matrix.

I immediately felt completely overwhelmed. I couldn't even remember what it meant to transpose a matrix, and I definitely hadn't seen anything matrix-related in the book. I went to Wikipedia and figured out that transposing a matrix just means swapping the rows and the columns. That seemed more possible, but I still didn't think I had the necessary tools to code it in Oz yet.

I decided to try solving the problem in Python. Python is sometimes called "executable pseudocode", and sure enough, the solution came to me pretty easily:
m = [[1, 2, 3],
[4, 5, 6]]

def transpose(m):
transposed = []
if len(m) >= 1:
len_cols = len(m[0])
for col in xrange(len_cols):
transposed_row = []
for row in m:
return transposed

print transpose(m)
Now, in real life, I might refactor that into the following:
m = [[1, 2, 3],
[4, 5, 6]]

def transpose(m):
if not m:
return []
return [[row[col] for row in m]
for col in xrange(len(m[0]))]

print transpose(m)
However, the goal was to write the solution in Oz, not Python. Hence, I started refactoring the code into something I could translate to Oz. Oz uses Lisp-like lists, not arrays, and at least for the chapter I'm in, it uses recursion, not foreach loops. Hence I ended up with:
m = [[1, 2, 3],
[4, 5, 6]]

def transpose(m):

def transpose_row(m, i, transposed_row):
if not m:
return transposed_row
car, cdr = m[0], m[1:]
transposed_row.insert(0, car[i])
return transpose_row(cdr, i, transposed_row)

def iter_row_len(i, transposed):
if i == row_len:
return transposed
transposed.insert(0, transpose_row(m, i, []))
return iter_row_len(i + 1, transposed)

if not m:
return m
row_len = len(m[0])
transposed = iter_row_len(0, [])
return transposed

print transpose(m)
At this point, it was fairly straightforward to translate that into Oz:
declare M
M = [[1 2 3]
[4 5 6]]

fun {Transpose M}
fun {TransposeRow M I TransposedRow}
case M
of nil then
{Reverse TransposedRow}
[] M1|Mr then
{TransposeRow Mr I {List.nth M1 I}|TransposedRow}
fun {IterRowLen I Transposed}
if I==RowLen+1 then
{Reverse Transposed}
{IterRowLen I+1 {TransposeRow M I nil}|Transposed}
case M
of nil then nil
[] M1|Mr then
RowLen={Length M1}
{IterRowLen 1 nil}

{Browse {Transpose M}} % Prints [[1 4] [2 5] [3 6]]
Viola! Problem solved!

That solution is pretty long, which just goes to show how bad an Oz programmer I am. I found someone else's solution online:
fun {Transpose Matrix}
{List.foldR Matrix
fun {$ R1 R2} { R1 R2 fun {$ E1 E2} E1|E2 end} end
for E in Matrix.1 collect:C do {C nil} end}
Obviously, he knows Oz and functional programming in general a heck of a lot better than I do.

The moral of the story is that Python can indeed serve as executable pseudocode, but it won't help me to think like an Oz programmer.


Paddy said…
A cute way of transposing
m = [[1, 2, 3], [4, 5, 6]]

thats it..done
jjinux said…
Bravo! I'd add the following, though, to make sure the lists stay lists:

map(list, zip(*m))

Popular posts from this blog

Ubuntu 20.04 on a 2015 15" MacBook Pro

I decided to give Ubuntu 20.04 a try on my 2015 15" MacBook Pro. I didn't actually install it; I just live booted from a USB thumb drive which was enough to try out everything I wanted. In summary, it's not perfect, and issues with my camera would prevent me from switching, but given the right hardware, I think it's a really viable option. The first thing I wanted to try was what would happen if I plugged in a non-HiDPI screen given that my laptop has a HiDPI screen. Without sub-pixel scaling, whatever scale rate I picked for one screen would apply to the other. However, once I turned on sub-pixel scaling, I was able to pick different scale rates for the internal and external displays. That looked ok. I tried plugging in and unplugging multiple times, and it didn't crash. I doubt it'd work with my Thunderbolt display at work, but it worked fine for my HDMI displays at home. I even plugged it into my TV, and it stuck to the 100% scaling I picked for the othe

ERNOS: Erlang Networked Operating System

I've been reading Dreaming in Code lately, and I really like it. If you're not a dreamer, you may safely skip the rest of this post ;) In Chapter 10, "Engineers and Artists", Alan Kay, John Backus, and Jaron Lanier really got me thinking. I've also been thinking a lot about Minix 3 , Erlang , and the original Lisp machine . The ideas are beginning to synthesize into something cohesive--more than just the sum of their parts. Now, I'm sure that many of these ideas have already been envisioned within , LLVM , Microsoft's Singularity project, or in some other place that I haven't managed to discover or fully read, but I'm going to blog them anyway. Rather than wax philosophical, let me just dump out some ideas: Start with Minix 3. It's a new microkernel, and it's meant for real use, unlike the original Minix. "This new OS is extremely small, with the part that runs in kernel mode under 4000 lines of executable code.&quo

Haskell or Erlang?

I've coded in both Erlang and Haskell. Erlang is practical, efficient, and useful. It's got a wonderful niche in the distributed world, and it has some real success stories such as CouchDB and Haskell is elegant and beautiful. It's been successful in various programming language competitions. I have some experience in both, but I'm thinking it's time to really commit to learning one of them on a professional level. They both have good books out now, and it's probably time I read one of those books cover to cover. My question is which? Back in 2000, Perl had established a real niche for systems administration, CGI, and text processing. The syntax wasn't exactly beautiful (unless you're into that sort of thing), but it was popular and mature. Python hadn't really become popular, nor did it really have a strong niche (at least as far as I could see). I went with Python because of its elegance, but since then, I've coded both p