Well, there's the Haskell Array Preprocessor (http://www.cs.utah.edu/~hal/APP/index.html), but I've never really used it. I think the first thing to notice is that Control.Monad really does contain a lot of functions which are useful control structures. The way that you wrote that loop seems extremely awkward to me. How I'd write it would be something like: import Control.Monad import Data.Array.IO main = do a <- (newArray (1,100) 1) :: IO (IOArray Int Int) forM [2..99] $ \i -> do v <- liftM2 (+) (readArray a (i-1)) (readArray a (i+1)) writeArray a i v print =<< getAssocs a (Note that forM = flip mapM is a recent addition to Control.Monad) It's possible to go quite a way to cleaning things up just using appropriate functions. On 12/12/06, Adam Megacz wrote:

Is there any work on automatic translation of code in some tiny imperative language into Haskell code that uses the ST and/or IO monads (or perhaps even pure functional code)?

For example, the user writes something vaguely like

array = newArray (1,100) 1 for x=2 to 99 array[x] := array[x-1]+array[x+1]

And it is transformed into something like

foldl (>>=) (newArray (1,100) 1) $ map (\n arr -> do a <- readArray arr (n-1) b <- readArray arr (n+1) writeArray arr n (a+b) return arr) [2..99]

Obviously the "small imperative language" would have to be highly restricted and carefully chosen in order for the translation to always work and be predictable. I'm interested in any existing work on choosing such a sublanguage.

Thanks!

- a

-- PGP/GPG: 5C9F F366 C9CF 2145 E770 B1B8 EFB1 462D A146 C380

_______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe