Haskell Bytestrings：如何模式匹配？

Question

I'm a Haskell newbie, and having a bit of trouble figuring out how to pattern match a ByteString . The [Char] version of my function looks like:

dropAB :: String -> String
dropAB []       = []
dropAB (x:[])   = x:[]
dropAB (x:y:xs) = if x=='a' && y=='b'
                  then dropAB xs
                  else x:(dropAB $ y:xs) 

As expected, this filters out all occurrences of "ab" from a string. However, I have problems trying to apply this to a ByteString .

The naive version

dropR :: BS.ByteString -> BS.ByteString
dropR []         = []
dropR (x:[])     = [x]
<...>

yields

Couldn't match expected type `BS.ByteString'
       against inferred type `[a]'
In the pattern: []
In the definition of `dropR': dropR [] = []

[] is clearly the culprit, as it is for a regular String not a ByteString . Subbing in BS.empty seems like the right thing but gives "Qualified name in the binding position: BS.empty." Leaving us to try

dropR :: BS.ByteString -> BS.ByteString
dropR empty              = empty        
dropR (x cons empty)     = x cons empty
<...>

this gives "parse error in pattern" for (x cons empty) . I don't really know what else I can do here.

As a side note, what I'm trying to do with this function is to filter out a specific UTF16 character from some text. If there's a clean way to accomplish that, I'd love to hear it, but this pattern matching error seems like something that a newbie haskeller should really understand.

Answer 1

You can use view patterns for such things

{-# LANGUAGE ViewPatterns #-}    
import Data.ByteString (ByteString, cons, uncons, singleton, empty)
import Data.ByteString.Internal (c2w) 

dropR :: ByteString -> ByteString
dropR (uncons -> Nothing) = empty
dropR (uncons -> Just (x,uncons -> Nothing)) = singleton x
dropR (uncons -> Just (x,uncons -> Just(y,xs))) =
    if x == c2w 'a' && y == c2w 'b'
    then dropR xs
    else cons x (dropR $ cons y xs)

Answer 2

The latest version of GHC (7.8) has a feature called pattern synonyms which can be added to gawi's example:

{-# LANGUAGE ViewPatterns, PatternSynonyms #-}

import Data.ByteString (ByteString, cons, uncons, singleton, empty)
import Data.ByteString.Internal (c2w)

infixr 5 :<

pattern b :< bs <- (uncons -> Just (b, bs))
pattern Empty   <- (uncons -> Nothing)

dropR :: ByteString -> ByteString
dropR Empty          = empty
dropR (x :< Empty)   = singleton x
dropR (x :< y :< xs)
  | x == c2w 'a' && y == c2w 'b' = dropR xs
  | otherwise                    = cons x (dropR (cons y xs))

Going further you can abstract this to work on any type class (this will look nicer when/if we get associated pattern synonyms ). The pattern definitions stay the same:

{-# LANGUAGE ViewPatterns, PatternSynonyms, TypeFamilies #-}

import qualified Data.ByteString as BS
import Data.ByteString (ByteString, singleton)
import Data.ByteString.Internal (c2w)
import Data.Word

class ListLike l where
  type Elem l

  empty  :: l
  uncons :: l -> Maybe (Elem l, l)
  cons   :: Elem l -> l -> l

instance ListLike ByteString where
  type Elem ByteString = Word8

  empty  = BS.empty
  uncons = BS.uncons
  cons   = BS.cons

instance ListLike [a] where
  type Elem [a] = a

  empty         = []
  uncons []     = Nothing
  uncons (x:xs) = Just (x, xs)
  cons          = (:)

in which case dropR can work on both [Word8] and ByteString :

-- dropR :: [Word8]    -> [Word8]
-- dropR :: ByteString -> ByteString
dropR :: (ListLike l, Elem l ~ Word8) => l -> l
dropR Empty          = empty
dropR (x :< Empty)   = cons x empty
dropR (x :< y :< xs)
  | x == c2w 'a' && y == c2w 'b' = dropR xs
  | otherwise                    = cons x (dropR (cons y xs))

And for the hell of it:

import Data.ByteString.Internal (w2c)

infixr 5 :•    
pattern b :• bs <- (w2c -> b) :< bs

dropR :: (ListLike l, Elem l ~ Word8) => l -> l
dropR Empty              = empty
dropR (x   :< Empty)     = cons x empty
dropR ('a' :• 'b' :• xs) = dropR xs
dropR (x   :< y   :< xs) = cons x (dropR (cons y xs))

You can see more on my post on pattern synonyms.

Answer 3

Patterns use data constructors. http://book.realworldhaskell.org/read/defining-types-streamlining-functions.html

Your empty is just a binding for the first parameter, it could have been x and it would not change anything.

You can't reference a normal function in your pattern so (x cons empty) is not legal. Note: I guess (cons x empty) is really what you meant but this is also illegal.

ByteString is quite different from String . String is an alias of [Char] , so it's a real list and the : operator can be used in patterns.

ByteString is Data.ByteString.Internal.PS !(GHC.ForeignPtr.ForeignPtr GHC.Word.Word8) !Int !Int (ie a pointer to a native char* + offset + length). Since the data constructor of ByteString is hidden, you must use functions to access the data, not patterns.

---

Here a solution (surely not the best one) to your UTF-16 filter problem using the text package:

module Test where

import Data.ByteString as BS
import Data.Text as T
import Data.Text.IO as TIO
import Data.Text.Encoding

removeAll :: Char -> Text -> Text
removeAll c t =  T.filter (/= c) t

main = do
  bytes <- BS.readFile "test.txt"
  TIO.putStr $ removeAll 'c' (decodeUtf16LE bytes)

Answer 4

For this, I would pattern match on the result of uncons :: ByteString -> Maybe (Word8, ByteString) .

Pattern matching in Haskell only works on constructors declared with 'data' or 'newtype.' The ByteString type doesn't export its constructors you cannot pattern match.

Answer 5

Just to address the error message you received and what it means:

Couldn't match expected type `BS.ByteString'
       against inferred type `[a]'
In the pattern: []
In the definition of `dropR': dropR [] = []

So the compiler expected your function to be of type: BS.ByteString -> BS.ByteString because you gave it that type in your signature. Yet it inferred (by looking at the body of your function) that the function is actually of type [a] -> [a] . There is a mismatch there so the compiler complains.

The trouble is you are thinking of (:) and [] as syntactic sugar, when they are actually just the constructors for the list type (which is VERY different from ByteString).