A BDSM-style collar that buckles in the back. ...

Image via Wikipedia

For a long time now I’ve been completely in love with functional programming to the point that I write functional-style code even in run of the mill normal languages.

There are many reasons I like functional code, the paper Why functional programming matters, by John Hughes sums up my opinion perfectly.

A few days ago I came upon a problem that killed my idea of functional code being superior and awesome beyond belief. This might have happened because I’m not a very good functional programmer yet, or the tool I was using (javascript) just doesn’t support the right things … but I doubt I would have written it any better in clojure.

The problem is one of turning a list of values, say, [A, B, C, D] into a list of pairs with itself, like so [[A,B], [A,C], [A,D], [B, C], [B,D], [C,D]].

Should be simple enough right? You just make another list shifted by one to the left, make a zip, then repeat until the second list is empty. This solution turns out to be horrible, looks ugly and I’m not even going to show it. So here’s my second functional solution … it’s a lot cleaner.

function pairs_functional2(data) {
    return _.reduce(_.map(_.range(1, _.size(data)),
                         function (i) {
                             return _.map(_.rest(data, i),
                                          function (item) {
                                              return [data[i-1], item];
                   function (memo, pairs) {
                       _.map(pairs, function (pair) {
                       return memo;
                   }, []);

A little syntactic sugar wouldn’t hurt … writing a lambda in javascript isn’t the cleanest of beasts. That final reduce down there also isn’t the best of things from a functional standpoint. I don’t like that push, but honestly I didn’t know how to do that better.

Here’s an iterative solution for comparison:

function pairs_iterative(data) {
    var out = [];
    for (var i=0; i < _.size(data); i++) {
        for (var j=i+1; j < _.size(data); j++) {
            out.push([data[i], data[j]]);
    return out;

I haven’t looked at performance, but both implementations are functionally the same … I’m feeling a bit at a loss here. Am I doing something stupid in the first implementation? Or is this just the kind of problem that fits iterative programming better than functional?

I’m tempted to do an implementation in clojure just to see if this thing looks so ugly in javascript on account of the syntax …

PS: the original implementation uses underscore.js so it works in all browsers just as the iterative would. Also I don’t think javascript natively has enough such functions … it would be even uglier.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Learned something new? Want to improve your skills?

Join over 10,000 engineers just like you already improving their skills!

Here's how it works 👇

Leave your email and I'll send you an Interactive Modern JavaScript Cheatsheet 📖right away. After that you'll get thoughtfully written emails every week about React, JavaScript, and your career. Lessons learned over my 20 years in the industry working with companies ranging from tiny startups to Fortune5 behemoths.

PS: You should also follow me on twitter 👉 here.
It's where I go to shoot the shit about programming.