X-Git-Url: http://lambda.jimpryor.net/git/gitweb.cgi?p=lambda.git;a=blobdiff_plain;f=zipper-lists-continuations.mdwn;h=d16a24e803351fc7af2dd3054ec48c07edc10402;hp=8858a8930699f29335825e27600ff8c2f6bbb253;hb=fd01533abbf1c7e00f28285431e925298e728f42;hpb=3f6acf2fe4a06afd2da601e360c86c906e1b7182 diff --git a/zipper-lists-continuations.mdwn b/zipper-lists-continuations.mdwn index 8858a893..d16a24e8 100644 --- a/zipper-lists-continuations.mdwn +++ b/zipper-lists-continuations.mdwn @@ -642,3 +642,94 @@ generalizing the type of the continuation monad to type ('a -> 'b -> 'c) continuation = ('a -> 'b) -> 'c;; +The tree monad +-------------- + +Of course, by now you may have realized that we have discovered a new +monad, the tree monad: + +
+type 'a tree = Leaf of 'a | Node of ('a tree) * ('a tree);;
+let tree_unit (x:'a) = Leaf x;;
+let rec tree_bind (u:'a tree) (f:'a -> 'b tree):'b tree = 
+  match u with Leaf x -> f x 
+             | Node (l, r) -> Node ((tree_bind l f), (tree_bind r f));;
+
+ +For once, let's check the Monad laws. The left identity law is easy: + + Left identity: bind (unit a) f = bind (Leaf a) f = fa + +To check the other two laws, we need to make the following +observation: it is easy to prove based on tree_bind by a simple +induction on the structure of the first argument that the tree +resulting from `bind u f` is a tree with the same strucure as `u`, +except that each leaf `a` has been replaced with `fa`: + +\tree (. (fa1) (. (. (. (fa2)(fa3)) (fa4)) (fa5))) +
+                .                         .       
+              __|__                     __|__   
+              |   |                     |   |   
+              a1  .                    fa1  .   
+                 _|__                     __|__ 
+                 |  |                     |   | 
+                 .  a5                    .  fa5
+   bind         _|__       f   =        __|__   
+                |  |                    |   |   
+                .  a4                   .  fa4  
+              __|__                   __|___   
+              |   |                   |    |   
+              a2  a3                 fa2  fa3         
+
+ +Given this equivalence, the right identity law + + Right identity: bind u unit = u + +falls out once we realize that + + bind (Leaf a) unit = unit a = Leaf a + +As for the associative law, + + Associativity: bind (bind u f) g = bind u (\a. bind (fa) g) + +we'll give an example that will show how an inductive proof would +have to proceed. Let `f a = Node (Leaf a, Leaf a)`. Then + +\tree (. (. (. (. (a1)(a2))))) +\tree (. (. (. (. (a1) (a1)) (. (a1) (a1))) )) +
+                                           .
+                                       ____|____
+          .               .            |       |
+bind    __|__   f  =    __|_    =      .       .
+        |   |           |   |        __|__   __|__
+        a1  a2         fa1 fa2       |   |   |   |
+                                     a1  a1  a1  a1  
+
+ +Now when we bind this tree to `g`, we get + +
+           .
+       ____|____
+       |       |
+       .       .
+     __|__   __|__
+     |   |   |   |
+    ga1 ga1 ga1 ga1  
+
+ +At this point, it should be easy to convince yourself that +using the recipe on the right hand side of the associative law will +built the exact same final tree. + +So binary trees are a monad. + +Haskell combines this monad with the Option monad to provide a monad +called a +[SearchTree](http://hackage.haskell.org/packages/archive/tree-monad/0.2.1/doc/html/src/Control-Monad-SearchTree.html#SearchTree) +that is intended to +represent non-deterministic computations as a tree.