I have a List[A], how is a idiomatic way of removing duplicates given an equality function (a:A, b:A) => Boolean? I cannot generally override equalsfor A
The way I can think now is creating a wrapping class AExt with overridden equals, then
list.map(new AExt(_)).distinct
But I wonder if there's a cleaner way.
There is a simple (simpler) way to do this:
list.groupBy(_.key).mapValues(_.head)
If you want you can use the resulting map instantly by replacing _.head by a function block like:
sameElements => { val observedItem = sameElements.head
new A (var1 = observedItem.firstAttr,
var2 = "SomethingElse") }
to return a new A for each distinct element.
There is only one minor problem. The above code (list.groupBy(_.key).mapValues(_.head)) didnt explains very well the intention to remove duplicates. For that reason it would be great to have a function like distinctIn[A](attr: A => B) or distinctBy[A](eq: (A, A) -> Boolean).
groupBy tends to imply eager evaluation.Using the Foo and customEquals from misingFaktor's answer:
case class Foo(a: Int, b: Int)
val (a, b, c, d) = (Foo(3, 4), Foo(3, 1), Foo(2, 5), Foo(2, 5))
def customEquals(x: Foo, y: Foo) = x.a == y.a
(Seq(a, b, c, d).foldLeft(Seq[Foo]()) {
(unique, curr) => {
if (!unique.exists(customEquals(curr, _)))
curr +: unique
else
unique
}
}).reverse
If result ordering is important but the duplicate to be removed is not, then foldRight is preferable
Seq(a, b, c, d).foldRight(Seq[Foo]()) {
(curr, unique) => {
if (!unique.exists(customEquals(curr, _)))
curr +: unique
else
unique
}
}
I must say I think I'd go via an intermediate collection which was a Set if you expected that your Lists might be quite long as testing for presence (via exists or find) on a Seq is O(n) of course:
Rather than write a custom equals; decide what property the elements are equal by. So instead of:
def myCustomEqual(a1: A, a2: A) = a1.foo == a2.foo && a1.bar == a2.bar
Make a Key. Like so:
type Key = (Foo, Bar)
def key(a: A) = (a.foo, a.bar)
Then you can add the keys to a Set to see whether you have come across them before.
var keys = Set.empty[Key]
((List.empty[A] /: as) { (l, a) =>
val k = key(a)
if (keys(k)) l else { keys += k; a +: l }
}).reverse
Of course, this solution has worse space complexity and potentially worse performance (as you are creating extra objects - the keys) in the case of very short lists. If you do not like the var in the fold, you might like to look at how you could achieve this using State and Traverse from scalaz 7
scala> case class Foo(a: Int, b: Int)
defined class Foo
scala> val (a, b, c, d) = (Foo(3, 4), Foo(3, 1), Foo(2, 5), Foo(2, 5))
a: Foo = Foo(3,4)
b: Foo = Foo(3,1)
c: Foo = Foo(2,5)
d: Foo = Foo(2,5)
scala> def customEquals(x: Foo, y: Foo) = x.a == y.a
customEquals: (x: Foo, y: Foo)Boolean
scala> Seq(a, b, c, d) filter {
| var seq = Seq.empty[Foo]
| x => {
| if(seq.exists(customEquals(x, _))) {
| false
| } else {
| seq :+= x
| true
| }
| }
res13: Seq[Foo] = List(Foo(3,4), Foo(2,5))
distinct: lampsvn.epfl.ch/trac/scala/browser/scala/tags/R_2_9_1_final/src/… So looking at the source code can sometimes help.
foldleft is more elegant.Starting Scala 2.13, we can use the new distinctBy method which returns elements of a sequence ignoring the duplicates as determined by == after applying a transforming function f:
def distinctBy[B](f: (A) => B): List[A]
For instance:
// case class A(a: Int, b: String, c: Double)
// val list = List(A(1, "hello", 3.14), A(2, "world", 3.14), A(1, "hello", 12.3))
list.distinctBy(x => (x.a, x.b)) // List(A(1, "hello", 3.14), A(2, "world", 3.14))
list.distinctBy(_.c) // List(A(1, "hello", 3.14), A(1, "hello", 12.3))
case class Foo (a: Int, b: Int)
val x = List(Foo(3,4), Foo(3,1), Foo(2,5), Foo(2,5))
def customEquals(x : Foo, y: Foo) = (x.a == y.a && x.b == y.b)
x.foldLeft(Nil : List[Foo]) {(list, item) =>
val exists = list.find(x => customEquals(item, x))
if (exists.isEmpty) item :: list
else list
}.reverse
res0: List[Foo] = List(Foo(3,4), Foo(3,1), Foo(2,5))
