Comparison of C++ and Haskell for Project Euler

I've already solved quite a few of the problems on Project Euler using C++, but as I've recently been learning Haskell, I decided to redo them all using it. Solving real problems is a good way to learn a new language and as I've already done them in C++ I can make some comparisons between the two languages.

Haskell for Maths Problems

Without using Haskell for very long it's easy to see that it is well suited to maths problems. This is because the syntax is optimised for expressing mathematical statements and it often resembles maths notation. For example, consider the following definition for the absolute function, absolute:

absolute n
  | n >= 0    = n
  | otherwise = -n

You don't need to know Haskell to figure out what this function does. Another frequently used example is the factorial function. It can be defined, for example, in the following three ways:

factorial n
  | n == 0    = 1
  | otherwise = n * factorial (n-1)

factorial2 0 = 1
factorial2 n = n * factorial2 (n-1)

factorial3 n = product [1..n]

Not only are these more succinct than in a procedural language, but they also read more naturally.

Haskell for Project Euler, Problem 5

Given Haskell's suitability for maths problems, it should be well suited to Project Euler. I'll demonstrate that here using Problem 5, "What is the smallest positive number that is evenly divisible by all of the numbers from 1 to 20?"

Firstly, here is an explanation of my approach. The solution must be a multiple of all the prime numbers below 20, and as they don't share any common factors the solution must be a multiple of the product of the primes below 20. Therefore I calculate this product and test multiples of it until I find the first one that the non primes below 20 also divide evenly into.

Here is the solution implemented in C++

bool isValidAnswer(int numberToCheck) {
  vector<u64> nonPrimesTo20{ 4, 6, 8, 9, 10, 12, 14, 15, 16, 18 };
  auto isMultiple = true;
  for_each(nonPrimesTo20.begin(), nonPrimesTo20.end(), [&](u64 n) {
    if (numberToCheck%n != 0) {
      isMultiple = false;
    }
  });
  return isMultiple;
}

int main(void) {
  const auto productOfPrimesTo20 = 2*3*5*7*11*13*17*19;
  auto numberToCheck = productOfPrimesTo20;

  while (!isValidAnswer(numberToCheck)) {
    numberToCheck += productOfPrimesTo20;
  }
  cout << "Answer is " << numberToCheck << endl;
  return 0;
}

and here is the same algorithm implemented in Haskell:

productOfPrimesTo20 = 2 * 3 * 5 * 7 * 11 * 13 * 17 * 19
nonPrimesTo20 = [4, 6, 8, 9, 10, 12, 14, 15, 16, 18]
isValidAnswer x = and [mod x n == 0 | n <- nonPrimesTo20]
answer = head [x | x <- [productOfPrimesTo20, productOfPrimesTo20*2..], isValidAnswer x]

Again, it is clear that the Haskell solution is much more succinct than in C++. Not only that, but if you understand the Haskell notation, the Haskell solution is also more expressive, and it's easier to read as you don't need to keep track of a loop or any variables.

If you're not familiar with Haskell then this code will look pretty obfuscated, but I've got posts coming up on Haskell prime number generation that explain many of the techniques used above.