Blog post about the new enumerators

_posts/2013-12-11-elixir-s-new-continuable-enumerators.markdown

@@ -0,0 +1,209 @@
+---
+layout: post
+title: Elixir's new continuable enumerators
+author: Peter Minten
+category: "What's New in Elixir"
+excerpt: In 0.12.0 Elixir's enumerators have gained the ability to suspend value
+         production and to terminate early.
+---
+
+As you may have heard in the upcoming 0.12.0 release Elixir's enumerators gained
+some new features. In this blog post I'll explain what's new, what it enables
+and how it works.
+
+For those of you who use the development version of Elixir these changes are
+already available. For the exact differences in code you can look at the
+[relevant pull request](https://github.com/elixir-lang/elixir/pull/1922).
+
+## A recap of enumerators, and some terminology
+
+The basic idea of enumerators is that you traverse some data structure or
+resource (lines from a file) by putting the thing that is traversed in control.
+That is if you're reading from a file you have a loop that reads lines from a
+file and for each line calls a function. Just calling a function isn't all that
+useful for most tasks as there'd be no way to remember previous lines (ugly
+hacks aside), so some accumulator value is passed to the function and a new
+accumulator is returned by it.
+
+For example here's how you can count the total length of strings in a list.
+
+```elixir
+Enumerable.reduce(l, 0, fn x, acc -> String.length(x) + acc end)
+```
+
+Often the actual call to `Enumerable.reduce/3` is hidden inside another
+function.  Say that we want to define a `sum` function. The usual way is to
+write it like this:
+
+```elixir
+def sum(coll) do
+  Enumerable.reduce(coll, 0, fn x, acc -> x + acc end)
+end
+```
+
+This could get called as `Enum.map(1..10, &(&1 * &1)) |> sum()` to get the sum of
+squares. Desugaring this means `sum(Enum.map(1..10, &(&1 * &1)))`.
+
+The general pattern is this:
+
+```elixir
+def outer_function(coll, ...) do
+  ...
+  Enumerable.reduce(coll, initial_consumer_acc, consumer)
+  ...
+end
+
+something_that_returns_an_enumerable(...) |> outer_function(...)
+```
+
+You'll notice the slightly uncommon terminology of "outer function" and
+"consumer" (normally called an "iteratee"). That's intentional, naming an
+iteratee a consumer better reflects that it consumes values.
+
+Along the same lines I call the reduce function for a specific enumerable a
+producer, it produces values which are given to a consumer.
+
+The outer function is the function to which the enumerable is passed.
+Syntactically it looks like this is the consumer, but it's really a function
+that combines the producer and the consumer. For simple consumers (say `fn x,
+acc -> length(x) + acc end`) the consumer will often be written directly in the
+source text of the outer function, but let's try to keep those concepts
+distinguished.
+
+## Two issues with classic Elixir enumerators
+
+Enumerators are great, but they have their limitations. One issue is that it's
+not possible to define a function that only returns at most 3 elements without
+traversing all elements or using ugly tricks such as `throw` (with a
+`try...catch` construct in the outer function). The `throw` trick is used in
+`Enum` and `Stream` to implement functions such as `Enum.take/2` and
+`Stream.take_while/2`. It works, but it's not what I'd call stylish.
+
+A bigger problem, that doesn't have a workaround, is that there's no way to
+interleave two enumerables. That is, it's not possible to define a function that
+for two enumerables `A` and `B` returns a list `[A1, B1, A2, B2, A3, ...]`
+(where `A1` is the first element of A) without first traversing both lists and
+then interleaving the collected values. Interleaving is important because it's
+the basis of a zip function. Without interleaving you cannot implement
+`Stream.zip/2`.
+
+The underlying problem, in both cases, is that the producer is fully in control.
+The producer simply pushes out as many elements to the consumer as it wants and
+then says "I'm done". There's no way aside from `throw`/`raise` for a consumer
+to tell a producer "stop producing". There is definitely no way to tell a
+producer "stop for now but be prepared to continue where you left off later".
+
+## Power to the consumer!
+
+At CodeMeshIO José Valim and Jessica Kerr sat down and discussed this problem.
+They came up with a solution inspired by a [Monad.Reader
+article](http://themonadreader.files.wordpress.com/2010/05/issue16.pdf) (third
+article). It's an elegant extension of the old system, based on a simple idea.
+Instead of returning only an accumulator at every step (for every produced
+value) the consumer returns a combination of an accumulator and an instruction
+to the producer. Three instructions are available:
+
+* `:cont` - Keep producing.
+* `:halt` - Stop producing.
+* `:suspend` - Temporarily stop producing.
+
+A consumer that always returns `:cont` makes the producer behave exactly the
+same as in the old system. A consumer may return `:halt` to have the producer
+terminate earlier than it normally would.
+
+The real magic is in `:suspend` though. It tells a producer to return the
+accumulator and a continuation function. 
+
+```elixir
+{ :suspended, n_, cont } = Enumerable.reduce(1..5, { :cont, 0 }, fn x, n ->
+  if x == 3 do
+    { :suspend, n }
+  else
+    { :cont, n + x }
+  end
+end)
+```
+
+After running this code `n_` will be `3` (1 + 2) and `cont` will be a
+function. We'll get back to `cont` in a minute but first take a look at some of
+the new elements here. The initial accumulator has an instruction as well, so
+you could suspend or halt a producer immediately, if you really want to. The
+value passed to the consumer (`n`) does not contain the instruction. The return
+value of the producer also has a symbol in it. Like with the instructions of
+consumers there are three possible values:
+
+* `:done` - Completed normally.
+* `:halted` - Consumer returned a `:halt` instruction.
+* `:suspended` - Consumer return a `:suspend` instruction.
+
+Together with the other values returned the possible return values from a
+producer are `{ :done, acc } | { :halted, acc } | { :suspended, acc,
+continuation }`.
+
+Back to the continuation. A continuation is a function that given an accumulator
+returns a new producer result. In other words it's a way to swap out the
+accumulator but keep the same producer in the same state.
+
+## Implementing `interleave`
+
+Using the power of suspension it is now possible to create an interleave
+function.
+
+```elixir
+def interleave(a, b) do
+  step = fn x, acc -> [x|acc] end
+  af = &Enumerable.reduce(a, &1, step)
+  bf = &Enumerable.reduce(b, &1, step)
+  do_interleave(af, bf, []) |> :lists.reverse()
+end
+
+defp do_interleave(a, b, acc) do
+  case a.({ :cont, acc }) do
+    { :suspended, acc, a } ->
+      case b.({ :cont, acc }) do
+        { :suspended, acc, b } ->
+          do_interleave(a, b, acc)
+        { :done, acc } ->
+          # Get remainder of a's entries
+          { :done, acc } = a.({ :cont, acc }, fn x, acc -> [x|acc] end)
+          acc
+      end
+    { :done, acc } ->
+      { :done, acc } = b.({ :cont, acc }, fn x, acc -> [x|acc] end)
+      acc
+  end
+end
+```
+
+Lets go through this step by step. The main `interleave` function first
+partially applies `Enumerable.reduce/3` to get function values that work just
+like the continuations. This makes things easier for `do_interleave`.
+
+The `do_interleave` function first calls `a` (`af` from `interleave`) with the
+`step` function so that the available element of `a` gets added to the
+accumulator and `a` immediately suspends afterwards. Then the same is done for
+`b`. If either producer is done all the remaining elements of the other get
+added to the accumulator list.
+
+Note that `acc` is sometimes used to mean a tuple like `{ :cont, x }` and
+sometimes the accumulator value proper. It's a bit confusing, yes.
+
+This example shows that through clever combination of an outer function
+(`do_interleave`) and an inner function `step` two producers can be interleaved.
+
+## `Enum.reduce` and `Enumerable.reduce` are now slightly different
+
+In the old system `Enum.reduce/3` simply called `Enumerable.reduce/3` with the
+same arguments. In order to keep the `Enum.reduce/3` function simple to use this
+is no longer the case in the new system. `Enum.reduce/3` now calls
+`Enumerable.reduce/3`
+with a very simple wrapper around the passed function: `fn x, acc -> { :cont,
+f.(x, acc) } end`. Thus `Enum.reduce/3` works just as it has always done, it
+calls the supplied function for every produced element without the possibility
+of halting or suspending the producer.
+
+## Conclusion
+
+The new system of enumerators certainly makes things a bit more complicated but
+also adds power. I suspect many interesting and "interesting" functions can be
+built on top of it.