MaybeT m的应用实例假设Monad m

Question

I've been using the Haxl monad (described here: http://www.reddit.com/r/haskell/comments/1le4y5/the_haxl_project_at_facebook_slides_from_my_talk ), which has the interesting feature that <*> for its Applicative instance isn't the same as ap from Control.Monad. This is a key feature that allows it to do concurrent computations without blocking. For example, if hf and ha are long computations, then

let hf :: Haxl (a -> b) = ...
    ha :: Haxl a = ...
in do
  f <- hf
  a <- ha
  return (f a)

will do them sequentially, while

hf <*> ha

will do them in parallel and then combine the results.

I would like to be able to run computations in MaybeT Haxl , but the problem is that the Applicative instance for MaybeT m in the transformers package uses monadic bind:

instance (Functor m, Monad m) => Applicative (MaybeT m) where
    pure = return
    (<*>) = ap

Where ap = liftM2 id is from Control.Monad . This makes

let hmf :: MaybeT Haxl (a -> b) = ...
    hma :: MaybeT Haxl a = ...
in hmf <*> hma

run sequentially. It seems like a better instance would be more like

instance (Applicative m) => Applicative (MaybeT m) where
    pure = MaybeT . pure . Just
    MaybeT f <*> MaybeT x = MaybeT $ (<*>) <$> f <*> x

(Here, (<*>) on the right-hand side is for the Maybe monad, while the non-parenthesized <*> on the right-hand side is for m .) Note that the context is different -- the above instance assumes only Applicative m , while the instance in transformers assumes Functor m, Monad m .

My main question is practical: what should I do about this? Should I roll my own MaybeT monad transformer? Is there some way to get around the "Duplicate instance declarations" complaint that ghc gives me if I try to write the above?

I'd also like to know: is the current setup a design flaw in the transformers package? If not, why not?

Answer 1

The trick is that (unlike monads) applicative functors are composable, so you don't need (applicative) transformers such as MaybeT . Instead, you can use Compose to combine two applicative functors together:

import Control.Applicative
import Data.Functor.Compose

type HaxlM = Compose Haxl Maybe

-- if you prefer to have a function for constructing values:
haxlM :: Haxl (Maybe a) -> HaxlM a
haxlM = Compose

The composition is always a proper instance of Applicative and use only the Applicative instance of their components. For example:

test = getZipList . getCompose
       $ (+) <$> Compose (ZipList [Just 1,  Nothing, Just 3])
             <*> Compose (ZipList [Nothing, Just 20, Just 30])

produces [Nothing,Nothing,Just 33] .