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 577063
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Editorial Team
Asked: May 13, 20262026-05-13T14:06:47+00:00 2026-05-13T14:06:47+00:00

What is a good way for a Haskell function to check a number of

  • 0

What is a good way for a Haskell function to check a number of different conditions and return an error message on a failure?

In Python or similar language, it would be straightforward:

if failure_1:
    return "test1 failed"
if failure_2:
    return "test2 failed"
...
if failure_n:
    return "testn failed"
do_computation

How do you do this without arbitrarily nested case/if statements in Haskell?

Edit: some of the test conditions may require IO which puts any test results in the IO monad. I believe this puts a kink in a number of solutions.

  • 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
    2026-05-13T14:06:48+00:00Added an answer on May 13, 2026 at 2:06 pm

    So, you’re stuck inside IO, and you want to check a bunch of conditions without lots of nested ifs. I hope you’ll forgive me a digression onto more general problem solving in Haskell by way of answering.

    Consider in abstract how this needs to behave. Checking a condition has one of two outcomes:

    • Success, in which case the program runs the rest of the function
    • Failure, in which case the program discards the rest of the function and returns the error message.

    Checking multiple conditions can be viewed recursively; each time it runs “the rest of the function” it hits the next condition, until reaching the final step which just returns the result. Now, as a first step to solving the problem, let’s break things apart using that structure–so basically, we want to turn a bunch of arbitrary conditions into pieces that we can compose together into a multi-conditional function. What can we conclude about the nature of these pieces?

    1) Each piece can return one of two different types; an error message, or the result of the next step.

    2) Each piece must decide whether to run the next step, so when combining steps we need to give it the function representing the next step as an argument.

    3) Since each piece expects to be given the next step, to preserve uniform structure we need a way to convert the final, unconditional step into something that looks the same as a conditional step.

    The first requirement obviously suggests we’ll want a type like Either String a for our results. Now we need a combining function to fit the second requirement, and a wrapping function to fit the third. Additionally, when combining steps, we may want to have access to data from a previous step (say, validating two different inputs, then checking if they’re equal), so each step will need to take the previous step’s result as an argument.

    So, calling the type of each step err a as a shorthand, what types might the other functions have?

    combineSteps :: err a -> (a -> err b) -> err b
    wrapFinalStep :: a -> err a
    

    Well now, those type signatures look strangely familiar, don’t they?

    This general strategy of “run a computation that can fail early with an error message” indeed lends itself to a monadic implementation; and in fact the mtl package already has one. More importantly for this case, it also has a monad transformer, which means that you can add the error monad structure onto another monad–such as IO.

    So, we can just import the module, make a type synonym to wrap IO up in a warm fuzzy ErrorT, and away you go:

    import Control.Monad.Error
    
    type EIO a = ErrorT String IO a
    
    assert pred err = if pred then return () else throwError err
    
    askUser prompt = do
        liftIO $ putStr prompt
        liftIO getLine
    
    main :: IO (Either String ())
    main = runErrorT test
    
    test :: EIO ()
    test = do
        x1 <- askUser "Please enter anything but the number 5: "
        assert (x1 /= "5") "Entered 5"
        x2 <- askUser "Please enter a capital letter Z: "
        assert (x2 == "Z") "Didn't enter Z"
        x3 <- askUser "Please enter the same thing you entered for the first question: "
        assert (x3 == x1) $ "Didn't enter " ++ x1
        return () -- superfluous, here to make the final result more explicit
    

    The result of running test, as you would expect, is either Right () for success, or Left String for failure, where the String is the appropriate message; and if an assert returns failure, none of the following actions will be performed.

    For testing the result of IO actions you may find it easiest to write a helper function similar to assert that instead takes an argument of IO Bool, or some other approach.

    Also note the use of liftIO to convert IO actions into values in EIO, and runErrorT to run an EIO action and return the Either String a value with the overall result. You can read up on monad transformers if you want more detail.

    • 0
    • Reply
    • Share
      Share
      • Share on Facebook
      • Share on Twitter
      • Share on LinkedIn
      • Share on WhatsApp
      • Report

Sidebar

Related Questions

What is a good way to represent finite automaton in Haskell? How would the
What is a good way to design/structure large functional programs, especially in Haskell? I've
What is a good way to run a time-consuming function from a C# webpage
What is a good way to fill a fixed number of text boxes on
I'm trying to find a good way to memoize a function for only part
I'm currently making my way through Learn You a Haskell for Great Good! ,
What is a good way to arrange images in the footer as shown in
Wondering what the best / good way of doing this would be in jQuery.
Question What is a good way of assigning a default value to an optional
Anyone knows a good way to use http live streaming tools on non-Mac platforms?

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.