Welcome to OGeek Q&A Community for programmer and developer-Open, Learning and Share
Welcome To Ask or Share your Answers For Others

Categories

0 votes
870 views
in Technique[技术] by (71.8m points)

performance - Two simple codes to generate divisors of a number. Why is the recursive one faster?

While solving a problem, I had to calculate the divisors of a number. I have two implementations that produce all divisors > 1 for a given number.

The first is using simple recursion:

divisors :: Int64 -> [Int64]
divisors k = divisors' 2 k
  where
    divisors' n k | n*n > k = [k]
                  | n*n == k = [n, k]
                  | k `mod` n == 0 = (n:(k `div` n):result)
                  | otherwise = result
      where result = divisors' (n+1) k

The second one uses list processing functions from the Prelude:

divisors2 :: Int64 -> [Int64]
divisors2 k = k : (concatMap (x -> [x, k `div` x]) $!
                  filter (x -> k `mod` x == 0) $! 
                  takeWhile (x -> x*x <= k) [2..])

I find that the first implementation is faster (I printed the whole list returned, so that no part of the result remains unevaluated due to laziness). The two implementations produce differently ordered divisors, but that is not a problem for me. (In fact, if k is a perfect square, the square root is output twice in the second implementation - again not a problem).

In general are such recursive implementations faster in Haskell? Also, I would appreciate any pointers to make either of these codes faster. Thanks!

EDIT:

Here is the code I am using to compare these two implementations for performance: https://gist.github.com/3414372

Here are my timing measurements:

Using divisor2 with strict evaluation ($!)

$ ghc --make -O2 div.hs 
[1 of 1] Compiling Main             ( div.hs, div.o )
Linking div ...
$ time ./div > /tmp/out1

real    0m7.651s
user    0m7.604s
sys 0m0.012s

Using divisors2 with lazy evaluation ($):

$ ghc --make -O2 div.hs 
[1 of 1] Compiling Main             ( div.hs, div.o )
Linking div ...
$ time ./div > /tmp/out1

real    0m7.461s
user    0m7.444s
sys 0m0.012s

Using function divisors

$ ghc --make -O2 div.hs 
[1 of 1] Compiling Main             ( div.hs, div.o )
Linking div ...
$ time ./div > /tmp/out1

real    0m7.058s
user    0m7.036s
sys 0m0.020s
See Question&Answers more detail:os

与恶龙缠斗过久,自身亦成为恶龙;凝视深渊过久,深渊将回以凝视…
Welcome To Ask or Share your Answers For Others

1 Reply

0 votes
by (71.8m points)

Since you asked, to make it faster a different algorithm should be used. Simple and straightforward is to find a prime factorization first, then construct the divisors from it somehow.

Standard prime factorization by trial division is:

factorize :: Integral a => a -> [a]
factorize n = go n (2:[3,5..])    -- or: `go n primes`
   where
     go n ds@(d:t)
        | d*d > n    = [n]
        | r == 0     =  d : go q ds
        | otherwise  =      go n t
            where  (q,r) = quotRem n d

-- factorize 12348  ==>  [2,2,3,3,7,7,7]

Equal prime factors can be grouped and counted:

import Data.List (group)

primePowers :: Integral a => a -> [(a, Int)]
primePowers n = [(head x, length x) | x <- group $ factorize n]
-- primePowers = map (head &&& length) . group . factorize

-- primePowers 12348  ==>  [(2,2),(3,2),(7,3)]

Divisors are usually constructed, though out of order, with:

divisors :: Integral a => a -> [a]
divisors n = map product $ sequence 
                    [take (k+1) $ iterate (p*) 1 | (p,k) <- primePowers n]

Hence, we have

numDivisors :: Integral a => a -> Int
numDivisors n = product  [ k+1                   | (_,k) <- primePowers n]

The product here comes from the sequence in the definition above it, because sequence :: Monad m => [m a] -> m [a] for list monad m ~ [] constructs lists of all possible combinations of elements picked by one from each member list, sequence_lists = foldr (xs rs -> [x:r | x <- xs, r <- rs]) [[]], so that length . sequence_lists === product . map length, and or course length . take n === n for infinite argument lists.

In-order generation is possible, too:

ordDivisors :: Integral a => a -> [a]
ordDivisors n = foldr ((p,k)-> foldi merge [] . take (k+1) . iterate (map (p*)))
                      [1] $ reverse $ primePowers n

foldi :: (a -> a -> a) -> a -> [a] -> a
foldi f z (x:xs) = f x (foldi f z (pairs xs))  where
         pairs (x:y:xs) = f x y:pairs xs
         pairs xs       = xs
foldi f z []     = z

merge :: Ord a => [a] -> [a] -> [a]
merge (x:xs) (y:ys) = case (compare y x) of 
           LT -> y : merge (x:xs)  ys
           _  -> x : merge  xs  (y:ys)
merge  xs     []    = xs
merge  []     ys    = ys

{- ordDivisors 12348  ==>  
[1,2,3,4,6,7,9,12,14,18,21,28,36,42,49,63,84,98,126,147,196,252,294,343,441,588,
686,882,1029,1372,1764,2058,3087,4116,6174,12348] -}

This definition is productive, too, i.e. it starts producing the divisors right away, without noticeable delay:

{- take 20 $ ordDivisors $ product $ concat $ replicate 5 $ take 11 primes
==> [1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20]
(0.00 secs, 525068 bytes)

numDivisors $ product $ concat $ replicate 5 $ take 11 primes
==> 362797056  -}

与恶龙缠斗过久,自身亦成为恶龙;凝视深渊过久,深渊将回以凝视…
OGeek|极客中国-欢迎来到极客的世界,一个免费开放的程序员编程交流平台!开放,进步,分享!让技术改变生活,让极客改变未来! Welcome to OGeek Q&A Community for programmer and developer-Open, Learning and Share
Click Here to Ask a Question

...