Sign Up

Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.

Have an account? Sign In

Have an account? Sign In Now

Sign In

Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.

Sign Up Here

Forgot Password?

Don't have account, Sign Up Here

Forgot Password

Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.

Have an account? Sign In Now

You must login to ask a question.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.

Sign InSign Up

The Archive Base

The Archive Base Logo The Archive Base Logo

The Archive Base Navigation

  • SEARCH
  • Home
  • About Us
  • Blog
  • Contact Us
Search
Ask A Question

Mobile menu

Close
Ask a Question
  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Feed
  • User Profile
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Buy Points
  • Users
  • Help
  • Buy Theme
  • SEARCH
Home/ Questions/Q 8958815
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Editorial Team
Asked: June 15, 20262026-06-15T15:18:08+00:00 2026-06-15T15:18:08+00:00

I’m trying to figure out the cleanest way to modify values nested inside of

  • 0

I’m trying to figure out the cleanest way to modify values nested inside of Maybe types (or other types for modeling partiality).

Here is the example setup:

{-# LANGUAGE TemplateHaskell #-}

import Control.Lens

data Outer = Outer { _inner :: Maybe Inner }
  deriving (Show)

data Inner = Inner { _foo :: Int }
  deriving (Show)

makeLenses ''Outer
makeLenses ''Inner

It’s pretty easy to do this in a somewhat messy fashion with lens:

wibble :: Outer -> Maybe Outer
wibble o = do i <- view inner o
              let i' = over foo succ i
              return $ set inner (Just i') o

To put a point on why this is nasty, here’s what I would like to be able to write:

wibble' :: Outer -> Maybe Outer
wibble' = overish inner.foo succ

overish = ???

A failure to look up a field should just make the whole operation fail, rather than making me explicitly check for failure at each point where it might happen.

Any suggestions? I’ve tried navigating the various lens modules, but nothing has quite appeared to fit the bill.

  • 1 1 Answer
  • 0 Views
  • 0 Followers
  • 0
Share
  • Facebook
  • Report

Leave an answer
Cancel reply

You must login to add an answer.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

1 Answer

  • Voted
  • Oldest
  • Recent
  • Random
  1. Editorial Team
    Editorial Team
    2026-06-15T15:18:09+00:00Added an answer on June 15, 2026 at 3:18 pm

    You can use over (inner.traverse.foo) to write to the nested field. This will not report failure the way you want though, because it succeeded in mapping over all 0 targets.

    traverse (from Data.Traversable, re-exported by Control.Lens) here gives you a Traversal for walking over the Maybe.

    You can read from it with (^?) to see if the target of the lens exists.

    We can solve this in several ways by using existing lens combinators to read and write separately, but we could just build such a combinator directly:

    import Data.Monoid (Any(..))
    import Control.Monad (guard)
    
    overish :: LensLike ((,) Any) s t a b -> (a -> b) -> s -> Maybe t
    overish l f s = case l (\a -> (Any True, f a)) s of
      (Any r, t) -> t <$ guard r
    

    You could write this with l %%~ \a -> (Any True, f a) as well.

    You can easily check if a Traversal has no targets by using nullOf, but this will require two passes and a higher rank type:

    overish :: Traversal s t a b -> (a -> b) -> s -> Maybe t
    overish l f s = over l f s <$ guard (not (nullOf l s))
    

    This is effectively just checking to see that there is a target and then applying the setter to it if there are targets.

    Then you can just use

    overish (inner.traverse.foo) succ
    
    • 0
    • Reply
    • Share
      Share
      • Share on Facebook
      • Share on Twitter
      • Share on LinkedIn
      • Share on WhatsApp
      • Report

Sidebar

Related Questions

I'm trying to decode HTML entries from here NYTimes.com and I cannot figure out
I know there's a lot of other questions out there that deal with this
I'm trying to convert HTML to plain text. I get many &\#8217; &\#8220; etc.
I'm new to using the Perl treebuilder module for HTML parsing and can't figure
I am trying to understand how to use SyndicationItem to display feed which is
Basically, what I'm trying to create is a page of div tags, each has
I have a string like this: La Torre Eiffel paragonata all&#8217;Everest What PHP function
link Im having trouble converting the html entites into html characters, (&# 8217;) i
I am trying to render a haml file in a javascript response like so:
I'm parsing an RSS feed that has an &#8217; in it. SimpleXML turns this

Explore

  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Users
  • Help
  • SEARCH

Footer

© 2021 The Archive Base. All Rights Reserved
With Love by The Archive Base

Insert/edit link

Enter the destination URL

Or link to existing content

    No search term specified. Showing recent items. Search or use up and down arrow keys to select an item.