# 11 Algebraic Datatypes

## 11.3 Data and Type Constructors

Just like values are kind-of like zero-order functions because they take no arguments, zero-order type and data constructors are like type values, or data values. We can also say “constants” instead of values.

## 11.4 Type constructors and Kinds

Now that we know about type constants, or zero-order type constructors, we can look at first and second order type constructors.

Remember that for functions the order of an expression is how many layers of function the expression has. In the notes for Chapter 7, I wrote:

Order Description Example
0 value, or literal “foobar”, 3
1 function ((+) 3 4)
2 function on functions map (+1) [1..10]
3 f on f on f iterate (map (+1)) [1..10]

With “higher-order” functions being functions with order greater than one.

It turns out that the conceptual pattern is useful for type constructors.

Order Description Kind Example
0 type constant * Bool
1 type constructor (* -> *) Maybe a
2 function on functions (* -> *) -> * HKind a

where HKind a is, for example:

> data HKind a = Z (a Bool)
> :kind HKind
> (* -> *) -> *
> data Id a = Id a
> :type Z (Id True)
Z (Id True) :: HKind Id

HKind, as well as all type constructors with order greater than 1 are called “higher-order type constructors” or “higher-kinded types.”

Now what is this useful for? There’s a really useful typeclass called Functor, that is a higher-kinded type:

> :kind Functor
Functor :: (* -> *) -> Constraint

But maybe we’re getting a little ahead of ourselves here… Functor is covered in great detail in later chapters.

## 11.5 Data constructors and values

### Exercises: Dog Types

1. type constructor
2. * -> *
3. *
4. Num a => Doggies a
5. Doggies Integer
6. Doggies String
7. both?
8. a -> DogueDeBordeaux a
9. DogueDeBordeaux String

## 11.6 What’s a type and what’s data?

### Exercises: Vehicles

see Vehicles.hs

## 11.8 What makes these datatypes algebraic?

### Exercises: Cardinality

1. cardinality is 1
2. 3
3. 2^16 = 65536
4. 2^64
5. Int8 is an 8 bit integer. 2^8 is 256.

### Exercises: For Example

1. MakeExample’s type is Example, Example does not have a type, it is a type
2. Example has data constructor MakeExample with an instance of typeclass Show
3. MakeExample is a function from Int to Example

## 11.9 newtype

### Exercises: Logic Goats

see LogicGoats.hs

## 11.10 Sum types

### Exercises: Pity the Bool

1. 4, Bool has cardinality 2 and there are 2 Bools in the sum type, so 2 + 2 = 4
2. 258, the type can either be BoolyBool True, BoolyBool False or a Numba. If you go over the Int8 bounds, you get a compiler warning -Woverflowedliterals

When calculating cardinality of types, remember to add sum types and multiply product types.

## Exercises: How Does Your Garden Grow?

data Garden = Gardenia String
| Daisy String
| Rose String
| Lilac String
deriving Show

## 11.13 Constructing and deconstructing values

### Exercises: Programmers

see Programmers.hs

## 11.14 Function type is exponential

Here’s how I visualize why the function type is exponential:

The set theory definition is, roughly, that a function is a set of pairs of elements some input set A and elements of some output set B, such that there for each element a in A, there is one and only one pair (a, _) in f (assuming the function is total).

Suppose we’re considering functions from Bool to Bool. As haskell code:

f1 :: Bool -> Bool
f1 True = True
f1 False = True

But written as a set, f1 looks like:

{ {T, T},  {F, T} }

Another function f2 might be:

f2 :: Bool -> Bool
f2 True = True
f2 False = False
{ {T, T},  {F, F} }

So now let’s ask ourselves: How many distinct functions from Bool to Bool are there?

Well, Bool is small so we can just list them out:

{ {T, T},  {F, T} }
{ {T, T},  {F, F} }
{ {T, F},  {F, T} }
{ {T, F},  {F, F} }

So there are four, which from the book makes sense because Bool has a cardinality of 2 and function types as exponentials implies that the cardinality of Bool -> Bool is 2^2 = 4.

But, why is this the case? Here’s something interesting, in the listing of possible functions as sets:

{ {T, T},  {F, T} }
{ {T, T},  {F, F} }
{ {T, F},  {F, T} }
{ {T, F},  {F, F} }

We’re actually repeating a lot of information in each line. See how all the T’s and F’s line up in the first position of the pairs? We already know that in each function from Bool there’s going to be a value from the True input as well as a value from the False input. What makes the function unique is really the outputs, not the inputs.

Let’s rewrite the function listing, by picking an order for elements of Bool: True, False.

Then we can rewrite:

{ {T, T},  {F, T} } = TT
{ {T, T},  {F, F} } = TF
{ {T, F},  {F, T} } = FT
{ {T, F},  {F, F} } = FF

As long as we know the ordering True, False, we can figure out that the first symbol in the pair TF, for example, refers to to the output from True and the second symbol refers to the output from False.

In other words, when we look at a function, we can look up the function’s output for a given input by looking at what symbol appears the input’s position in the ordering.

For example, what does the function FT return for the input True? FT has an F for False in the True position, so it returns False.

The function FT and FF are the same in the True position, and differ in the False position.

This may remind you of how digits work in numbers, except instead of the ones position, tens position etc, the places represent inputs.

Watch what happens if we map the symbol T to 1 and the symbol F to 0:

TT = 11
TF = 10
FT = 01
FF = 00

These are all the 2 digit binary numbers. There are four of them, because each digit can be either 1 or 0, and there are two digits, so 2 symbols ^ 2 digits = 4

If there were three digits, there would be 2^3 = 8 possible numbers. If there were three digits in base ten there would be 10^3 = 1000 possible numbers.

The elements of a function’s input set can be mapped to “digit” positions, and the elements of the output set can be mapped to “digit” symbols. Then you can write down a unique representation of the function by writing the output symbols in the input positions. Because the number of possible unique representations is the same as the number of possible functions, and because the number of representations is the number of base symbols raised to the number of digits (base ^ digitnumber = uniques), the number of possible unique functions from one set to another is the number elements in the output set raised to the number of element in the input set.

1. 8
2. 16
3. 4^4 = 256
4. 222 = 8
5. 222 = 16
6. (44)2 = 65536

## 11.17 Binary Tree

### BinaryTree

see BinaryTree.hs

## 11.18 Chapter Exercises

1. a
2. c
3. b
4. c

### Ciphers

see Vignere.hs

### As-patterns

see AsPatterns.hs

### Language exercises

see LanguageExercises.hs

### Phone exercise

see Phone.hs

[TODO: I’m looking back on this code several months after writing it. It’s awkward, but I’ll leave it as is for now, since it’s an okay example of solving the problem with only the tools covered in the book thus far. I think I should do an example of how this project gets a lot easier when you can use things like the State monad.]

### Hutton’s Razor

see Hutton.hs