Sign Up

Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.

Have an account? Sign In

Have an account? Sign In Now

Sign In

Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.

Sign Up Here

Forgot Password?

Don't have account, Sign Up Here

Forgot Password

Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.

Have an account? Sign In Now

You must login to ask a question.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.

Sign InSign Up

The Archive Base

The Archive Base Logo The Archive Base Logo

The Archive Base Navigation

  • Home
  • SEARCH
  • About Us
  • Blog
  • Contact Us
Search
Ask A Question

Mobile menu

Close
Ask a Question
  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Feed
  • User Profile
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Buy Points
  • Users
  • Help
  • Buy Theme
  • SEARCH
Home/ Questions/Q 805315
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Editorial Team
Asked: May 15, 20262026-05-15T00:03:50+00:00 2026-05-15T00:03:50+00:00

What would be an elegant way to implement the functionality of this nested class

  • 0

What would be an elegant way to implement the functionality of this nested class in F#?

  private class Aliaser {
     private int _count;
     internal Aliaser() { }
     internal string GetNextAlias() {
        return "t" + (_count++).ToString();
     }
  }

This was my first attempt, but it feels like there should be a sexy one-liner for this:

let aliases = (Seq.initInfinite (sprintf "t%d")).GetEnumerator()

let getNextAlias() = 
    aliases.MoveNext() |> ignore
    aliases.Current
  • 1 1 Answer
  • 1 View
  • 0 Followers
  • 0
Share
  • Facebook
  • Report

Leave an answer
Cancel reply

You must login to add an answer.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

1 Answer

  • Voted
  • Oldest
  • Recent
  • Random
  1. Editorial Team
    Editorial Team
    2026-05-15T00:03:51+00:00Added an answer on May 15, 2026 at 12:03 am

    The usual way of writing is to create a function with local state captured in a closure:

    let getNextAlias = 
      let count = ref 0
      (fun () -> 
         count := !count + 1; 
         sprintf "t%d" (!count))
    

    The type of getNextAlias is simply unit -> string and when you call it repeatedly, it returns strings “t1”, “t2”, … This relies on mutable state, but the mutable state is hidden from the user.

    Regarding whether you can do this without mutable state – the simple answer is NO, because when you call a purely functional function with the same parameter twice, it must return the same result. Thus, you’d have to write something with the following structure:

    let alias, state1 = getNextAlias state0
    printf "first alias %s" alias
    let alias, state2 = getNextAlias state1
    printf "second alias %s" alias
    // ...
    

    As you can see, you’d need to keep some state and maintain it through the whole code. In F#, the standard way of dealing with this is to use mutable state. In Haskell, you could use State monad, which allows you to hide the passing of the state. Using the implementation from this question, you could write something like:

    let getNextAlias = state { 
      let! n = getState
      do! setState (n + 1)
      return sprintf "t%d" n }
    
    let program =
      state { 
        let! alias1 = getNextAlias()
        let! alias2 = getNextAlias() 
        // ...
      }
    
    execute progam 0 // execute with initial state
    

    This is quite similar to other computations such as lazy or seq, actually – computations in the state { .. } block have some state and you can execute them by providing initial value of the state. However, unless you have good reasons for requiring purely functional solution, I’d prefer the first version for practical F# programming.

    • 0
    • Reply
    • Share
      Share
      • Share on Facebook
      • Share on Twitter
      • Share on LinkedIn
      • Share on WhatsApp
      • Report

Sidebar

Related Questions

What would be the most elegant way to implement a Win32 equivalent of WaitForMultipleObjects
Would there a more elegant way of writing the following syntax? Thread t0 =
What is an elegant way to sort objects in PHP? I would love to
I am thinking about elegant way to encapsulate WinAPI callbacks inside a class. Suppose
What is the shortest / most elegant way to implement the following Scala code
I've always wanted to be able to get a reasonably elegant way of getting
If you have a full path like: C:\dir0\dir1\dir2\dir3\dir4\ how would you best implement it
I have this code and I want to keep it elegant. I got stuck
I'm looking for an elegant way to override values in an associative array. For
What is the easiest/most elegant way to do the following in python: def piecewiseProperty(aList):

Explore

  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Users
  • Help
  • SEARCH

Footer

© 2021 The Archive Base. All Rights Reserved
With Love by The Archive Base

Insert/edit link

Enter the destination URL

Or link to existing content

    No search term specified. Showing recent items. Search or use up and down arrow keys to select an item.