Look and say, ruby & clojure

look_and_say.clj

(ns look-and-say)

(defn- consecutive [string]
  (map first (re-seq #"(.)\1*" string)))

(defn- say [chars]
  [(count chars) (first chars)])

(defn- get-next [string]
  (apply str (mapcat say (consecutive string))))

(defn look-and-say [string]
  (iterate get-next string))

; (def las (look-and-say/look-and-say "1"))
; (take 2 las)
; => ("1" "11")
; (take 2 las)
; => ("1" "11")

look_and_say.rb

module LookAndSay
  class << self
    def look_and_say(string)
      Enumerator.new do |yielder|
        current = string
        loop do
          yielder << current
          current = get_next current
        end
      end
    end

    private

    def consecutive(string)
      string.scan(/((.)\2*)/).map &:first
    end

    def say(chars)
      [chars.length, chars[0]]
    end

    def get_next(string)
      consecutive(string).map(&method(:say)).join ''
    end
  end
end

# las = LookAndSay.look_and_say '1'
# las.take 2
# => ["1", "11"]
# las.take 2
# => ["1", "11"]

Honestly, it depends on what you’re trying to do. When you call #each with a block, it consumes the entire collection, so it’s not good if the collection is infinite, or if you want more control over when successive elements are generated.

But if you want to be most in line with StdLib, then do both: if a block is passed in to your #each, explicitly yield to that block for every element. If no block is passed in, then return an enumerator, and the caller can decide how to handle it. But… I think most of the time people don’t do that, ‘cause they don’t need to.

Ah... heh. Well, for my solution, yeah, #take doesn't work perfectly. There's a slightly longer way to write it where it works correctly, but harder to fit into a tweet:

def iterate(meth, arg)
  Enumerator.new do |yielder|
    current = arg
    loop do
      yielder << current
      current = send(meth, current)
    end
  end
end

By reassigning the method parameter, it prevents #take from working correctly.