Skip to main content

Why i changed the blog's name

This one's *not* be about programming... mostly. Ok, it is. It always is.

This is an explanation on why I changed the name I had for this blog. The previous name was officially Run or Debug, but now I called Left Fold. Why would you do that, you ask?

Well, the main story is because I hated the previous name but still I didn't have the courage (or the will) to change it. And truly, I didn't have a better name in mind... Until recently!

I started to learn F# recently and as a guy who comes mostly from C# a lot of concepts were new to me, and some were not new, I just didn't know their name. It has been quite a journey, as anyone who has the same background as me would understand. I jumped from a general OOP language to a non-pure functional language.

One of those concepts "learned" is called a left fold. I am aware it does exist in C# too, and it is all but new, but hear me out, I just never had thought about it this way. So, what the hell is a left fold after all? Let's dive in this surprisingly simple concept.

Think of a list of values. Let's say, a list of strings with the alphabet inside:

["a"; "b"; "c"; "d"; "e"; "f"; "g"; "h"; "i"; "j"; "k"; "l"; "m"; "n"; "o"; "p"; "q"; "r"; "s"; "t"; "u"; "v"; "w"; "x"; "y"; "z"]

The concept of fold is simply this: take an initial state and for each letter in that list produce a new state based on the letter. Then feed that state to the function along with the next letter and produce the next state. Let's see an example in C#:

Of course, everyone using Linq knows the Aggregate method. But really, how frequently do you use it? We use the variations surely... Sum, Max, Min, etc. But I never really thought about those methods in terms that they might be just a derivation from an underlying concept. And that concept is the left fold!

Let's look again at how it works, in simple terms:
  1. Start with a state. In the snippet above this state is an empty string implicitly, but there is another overload that accepts a seed state.
  2. Take that state and an item in the list, and execute the function passed in. The function should produce a new state.
  3. Repeat 2 for all items in the list.
Now let's define some of the LINQ methods in terms of Aggregate, just for kicks. This time we'll use a list of ints

So, you can see the usefulness of the concept now. In fact, many more Linq operators can be defined in terms of a left fold, those were just the most obvious ones. Of course, in the background they are actually not defined like that, but i'm getting a point across.

This is a big topic, but I don't want a big post, so let's call it a day.
TL;DR: I didn't like the previous name and I like this one because of how useful the actual concept is.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The repository's repository

Ever since I started delving into architecture,  and specifically service oriented architecture, there has been one matter where opinions get divided. Let me state the problem first, and then take a look at both sides of the barricade. Given that your service layer needs to access persistent storage, how do you model that layer? It is almost common knowledge what to do here: use the Repository design pattern. So we look at the pattern and decide that it seems simple enough! Let's implement the shit out of it! Now, let's say that you will use an ORM - here comes trouble. Specifically we're using EF, but we could be talking about NHibernate or really any other. The real divisive theme is this question: should you be using the repository pattern at all when you use an ORM? I'll flat out say it: I don't think you should... except with good reason. So, sharpen your swords, pray to your gods and come with me to fight this war... or maybe stay in the couch? ...

Follow up: improving the Result type from feedback

This post is a follow up on the previous post. It presents an approach on how to return values from a method. I got some great feedback both good and bad from other people, and with that I will present now the updated code taking that feedback into account. Here is the original: And the modified version: Following is some of the most important feedback which led to this. Make it an immutable struct This was a useful one. I can't say that I have ever found a problem with having the Result type as a class, but that is just a matter of scale. The point of this is that now we avoid allocating memory in high usage scenarios. This was a problem of scale, easily solvable. Return a tuple instead of using a dedicated Result type The initial implementation comes from a long time ago, when C# did not have (good) support for tuples and deconstruction wasn't heard of. You would have to deal with the Tuple type, which was a bit of a hassle. I feel it would complicate the ...

C# 2.0 - Partial Types

For those of you interested, i found a very interesting list of features that were introduced in C# in  here . This is a very complete list that contains all the features, and i'm explaining them one by one in this post series. We've talked about  Generics  and  Iterators . Now it's time for some partial types . A partial type  is a type which definition is spread across one or more files. It doesn't have to be in multiple separated files, but can be. This is a very simple concept that can give us many benefits, let's see: If a type is partial, multiple developers can work on every part of it. This allows a more organized way of working and can lead to production improvement.  Winforms , for example, generates a partial class for the form so that the client can separately edit other parts it. This way, a part contains information about the design and the other contains the logic of the form. In fact, this is a very spread pattern across .Net. Ent...