Hi. Consider this structure: vs :: Rational -> [Input] -> [[Output]] vs _ [] = return [] vs l (x:xs) = pms l x >>= \pm -> (pm :) <$> vs (l - dur pm) xs pms :: Rational -> Input -> [Output] pms l x = [x, x+1, x+2, ...] -- Just an example, not real code. -- in reality, l is used to determine -- the result of pms. This is basically traverse, but with a state (l) added to it. So without the state, vs could be written as vs = traverse pms Now, I want to add Either e to this, like: vs :: Rational -> [Input] -> Either e [[Output]] pms :: Rational -> Input -> Either e [Output] However, I have no idea how to implement vs. Interestingly, adding Either e to vs without changing the code lets it compile, but it gives me the wrong result: vs :: Rational -> [Input] -> Either e [[Output]] vs _ [] = return [] vs l (x:xs) = pms l x >>= \pm -> (pm :) <$> vs (l - pm) xs Since I am in the Either monad now, >>= does not do non-determinism, it simply unwraps the Either from pms. I have to admit, I dont fully understand why this compiles, and what exactly it does wrong. I only see from testing that the results can't be right. On IRC, Gurkenglas suggested to use the State monad, like this: vs :: Rational -> [Input] -> Either e [[Output]] vs l = `evalStateT l` . mapM v where v x = do l <- get pm <- lift $ pms l x put (l - dur pm) return pm This compiles, but also yields unexpected results. I have invested several hours now trying to add Either around this algorithm, so that I can emit hard failures. I am sort of frustrated and out of ideas. Somehow, I can't figure out what these transformations actually change in behaviour. I am being told, by quite experienced Haskell programmers, that this is supposed to be correct, but my testing tells me otherwise. So before I just give up on this, could someone please have a look and let me know if I have missed something obvious? -- CYa, ⡍⠁⠗⠊⠕