Re: [Haskell-beginners] Adding Either around a List monad?

Benjamin Edwards writes:

If you want to use monad transformers and have Either e [a] as the result type then you need Either to be the inner monad and List to be the outer monad. If you look at the types of EitherT (from the either package) and ListT from transformers this should hopefully make sense. Then you would keep the same impl as you have now, only you would need to "run" the ListT computation to yield Either e [a]. Anything that you would like to do inside of the inner Error monad will need to lifted inside of it using lift. Does that help you at all? Hmm, sort of, and also not :-) I finally managed to rewrite vs, however, I used either to handle Either:

vs :: Music.Dur -> AmbiguousVoice -> Either e [Voice] vs _ [] = return [[]] vs l (x:xs) = either Left f $ pms l x where f pms = fmap concat $ sequence $ pms >>= \pm -> return $ either Left (\pmss -> Right $ (pm :) <$> pmss) (vs (l - dur pm) xs) It doesn't particularily look pretty, but I am rather relieved I finally managed to make that change. Took me roughly 4 attempts, a lot of asking, and a few hours of playing around. On the positive side, I have learnt a lot. However, I wonder if there is a more idiomatic way of doing what I do above. Took me a long time to realize there is a concat missing. I guess this is the result of sequence being used to collapse the Eithers. Thanks for helping by providing input.

Ben

On Mon, 5 Oct 2015 at 11:06 Mario Lang wrote:

...

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, ⡍⠁⠗⠊⠕ _______________________________________________ Beginners mailing list Beginners@haskell.org http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/beginners

_______________________________________________ Beginners mailing list Beginners@haskell.org http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/beginners

-- CYa, ⡍⠁⠗⠊⠕ | Debian Developer URL:http://debian.org/ .''`. | Get my public key via finger mlang/key@db.debian.org : :' : | 1024D/7FC1A0854909BCCDBE6C102DDFFC022A6B113E44 `. `' `- URL:http://delysid.org/ URL:http://www.staff.tugraz.at/mlang/