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 6620627
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Editorial Team
Asked: May 25, 20262026-05-25T21:07:35+00:00 2026-05-25T21:07:35+00:00

type ErrorOrValue = Either InterpreterError Value evaluateExpression :: [Value] -> IR.Expression -> ErrorOrValue evaluateExpression

  • 0
type ErrorOrValue = Either InterpreterError Value 

evaluateExpression :: [Value] -> IR.Expression -> ErrorOrValue

evaluateExpression as (IR.Application l r) 
    | Left _ <- arg = arg
    | Right (Partial ac b as) <- f = foo as f arg
    | Right _ <- f = Left NonFunctionApplication
    | otherwise = f
    where
        f = evaluateExpression as l >>= forceValue
        arg = evaluateExpression as r

I need to call foo with f and arg making sure that they are not Left.

Can I reduce the pattern matching and instead use binds and other monad operations?

  • 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
    2026-05-25T21:07:36+00:00Added an answer on May 25, 2026 at 9:07 pm

    You can use do. Your code checks arg before f, and foo appears to return an ErrorOrValue, so it does not need to be lifted into the Monad. Also, the as that is passed to foo is that extracted from the Partial, not the argument to evaluateExpression. Here is some completely untested code:

    type ErrorOrValue = Either InterpreterError Value 
    
    evaluateExpression :: [Value] -> IR.Expression -> ErrorOrValue
    
    evaluateExpression as (IR.Application l r) =
        do arg <- evaluateExpression as r
           f <- evaluateExpression as l >>= forceValue
           case f of
               Partial ac b as -> foo as f arg
               otherwise -> Left NonFunctionApplication
    
    • 0
    • Reply
    • Share
      Share
      • Share on Facebook
      • Share on Twitter
      • Share on LinkedIn
      • Share on WhatsApp
      • Report

Sidebar

Related Questions

What type of iPhone application file should I use? Before, I was trying to
type Foo = class inherit Bar val _stuff : int new (stuff : int)
Exception Type: TypeError at /robots.txt Exception Value: 'str' object is not callable What gives?
Type of conditional expression cannot be determined because there is no implicit conversion between
Type.GetType(System.String) Is there a lookup for the aliases available somewhere? Type.GetType(string) returns null .
Which type of input is least vulnerable to Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) and SQL Injection
I type ArrayList memberNames = new ArrayList() { Jim, John, George }; and Visual
What type of authentication would you suggest for the service that is: implemented as
Consider type like this one public interface IHaveGenericMethod { T1 Method<T1>(T1 parm); T2 Method<T1,T2>(T1
Is type checking considered bad practice even if you are checking against an interface?

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.