OCaml non decreasing list without List.function - recursion

Question

Update: I can't use any List.function stuff.
I'm new to OCaml and I'm learning this course in which I'm supposed to calculate a list of non decreasing values from a list of values.
So for e.g. I have a list [1; 2; 3; 1; 2; 7; 6]
So function mono that takes in a list returns the following:
# mono [1; 2; 3; 1; 2; 7; 6];;
- : int list = [1; 2; 3; 7]
I do the following:
let rec calculateCheck value lst = (
match lst with
[] -> true
| x :: xs -> (
if (value < x) then
false
else
calculateCheck value xs
)
);;
let rec reverse_list lst = (
match lst with
[] -> []
| x :: xs -> (
reverse_list xs # [x]
)
);;
let shouldReverse = ref 1;;
let cancelReverse somelist lst = (
shouldReverse := 0;
reverse_list lst
);;
let rec mono lst = (
let somelist = ref lst in
if (!shouldReverse = 1) then
somelist := cancelReverse somelist lst
else
somelist := lst;
match !somelist with
[] -> []
| x :: xs -> (
if (calculateCheck x xs) then
[x] # mono xs
else
[] # mono xs
);
);;
Problem?
This only works once because of shouldReverse.
I cannot reverse the value; mono list should return non decreasing list.
Question?
Any easy way to do this?
Specifically how to get a subset of the list. For e.g. for [1; 2; 3; 5; 6], I want [1; 2; 3] as an output for 5 so that I can solve this issue recursively. The other thing, is you can have a list as [1; 2; 3; 5; 6; 5]:: so for the second 5, the output should be [1; 2; 3; 5; 6].
Any ideas?
Thanks

Answer 1

A good way to approach this kind of problem is to force yourself to
formulate what you're looking for formally, in a mathematically
correct way. With some training, this will usually get you
a description that is close to the final program you will write.
We are trying to define a function incr li that contains the
a strictly increasing subsequence of li. As Jeffrey Scoffield asked,
you may be looking for the
longest
such subsequence: this is an interesting and non-trivial algorithmic
problem that is well-studied, but given that you're a beginner
I suppose your teacher is asking for something simpler. Here is my
suggestion of a simpler specification: you are looking for all the
elements that are greater than all the elements before them in the
list.
A good way to produce mathematical definitions that are easy to turn
into algorithms is reasoning by induction: define a property on
natural numbers P(n) in terms of the predecessor P(n-1), or define
a property on a given list in terms of this property on a list of one
less element. Consider you want to define incr [x1; x2; x3; x4]. You
may express it either in terms of incr [x1; x2; x3] and x4, or in
terms of x1 and incr [x2; x3; x4].
incr [x1;x2;x3;x4] is incr[x1;x2;x3], plus x4 if it is bigger
than all the elements before it in the list, or, equivalently, the
biggest element of incr[x1;x2;x3]
incr [x1;x2;x3;x4] is incr[x2;x3;x4] where all the elements
smaller than x1 have been removed (they're not bigger than all
elements before them), and x1 added
These two precise definitions can of course be generalized to lists of
any length, and they give two different ways to write incr.
(* `incr1` defines `incr [x1;x2;x3;x4]` from `incr [x1;x2;x3]`,
keeping as intermediate values `subli` that corresponds to
`incr [x1;x2;x3]` in reverse order, and `biggest` the biggest
value encountered so far. *)
let incr1 li =
let rec incr subli biggest = function
| [] -> List.rev subli
| h::t ->
if h > biggest
then incr (h::subli) h t
else incr subli biggest t
in
match li with
| [] -> []
| h::t -> incr [h] h t
(* `incr2` defines `incr [x1;x2;x3;x4]` from `incr [x2;x3;x4]`; it
needs no additional parameter as this is just a recursive call on
the tail of the input list. *)
let rec incr2 = function
| [] -> []
| h::t ->
(* to go from `incr [x2;x3;x4]` to `incr [x1;x2;x3;x4]`, one
must remove all the elements of `incr [x2;x3;x4]` that are
smaller than `x1`, then add `x1` to it *)
let rec remove = function
| [] -> []
| h'::t ->
if h >= h' then remove t
else h'::t
in h :: remove (incr2 t)