Instead of having your functions take Vec<i64>
, I would instead suggest &[i64]
, or even &[f64]
to avoid the as f64
. This wouldn't really break your existing code, as you can just borrow a Vec<i64>
, to have it auto dereference into &[i64]
.
You can simplify add()
by using sum()
, and mul()
by using product()
.
pub fn add(arr: &[i64]) -> f64 {
arr.iter().map(|&x| x as f64).sum()
}
pub fn mul(arr: &[i64]) -> f64 {
arr.iter().map(|&x| x as f64).product()
}
You can similarly simplify sub()
and div()
with next()
and then fold()
.
pub fn sub(arr: &[i64]) -> f64 {
let mut it = arr.iter().map(|&x| x as f64);
it.next()
.map(|x| it.fold(x, |acc, x| acc - x))
.unwrap_or(0.0)
}
pub fn div(arr: &[i64]) -> f64 {
let mut it = arr.iter().map(|&x| x as f64);
it.next()
.map(|x| it.fold(x, |acc, x| acc / x))
.unwrap_or(0.0)
}
You can even simplify them further, by using fold_first()
. However that is currently experimental and nightly only. Instead you can use fold1()
from the itertools
crate, or reduce()
from the reduce
crate.
// itertools = "0.10"
use itertools::Itertools;
pub fn sub(arr: &[i64]) -> f64 {
arr.iter().map(|&x| x as f64).fold1(|a, b| a - b).unwrap_or(0.0)
}
pub fn div(arr: &[i64]) -> f64 {
arr.iter().map(|&x| x as f64).fold1(|a, b| a / b).unwrap_or(0.0)
}
You can even replace the closures with Sub::sub
and Div::div
.
// itertools = "0.10"
use itertools::Itertools;
use std::ops::{Div, Sub};
pub fn sub(arr: &[i64]) -> f64 {
arr.iter().map(|&x| x as f64).fold1(Sub::sub).unwrap_or(0.0)
}
pub fn div(arr: &[i64]) -> f64 {
arr.iter().map(|&x| x as f64).fold1(Div::div).unwrap_or(0.0)
}
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…