Let's say I have the following code (text in <>
is a shorthand, not actually part of the code):
data A = <something>
defaultA :: A
defaultA = <Really complicated expression of type A>
Now I want to have a function pattern match on defaultA
, like this:
f defaultA = <case 1>
f _ = <case 2>
However, defaultA
in the first line becomes a new variable, not a condition that means the parameter will equal defaultA
. The best way I know to achieve something like what I want is:
f x | x == defaultA = <case 1>
f _ = <case 2>
Does anyone know a better way?
If the definiton of defaultA
consists only of constructor calls, you could use a pattern synonym.
{-# LANGUAGE PatternSynonyms #-}
data A = A Int
pattern DefaultA = A 3
isDefaultA DefaultA = putStrLn "it was a default"
isDefaultA _ = putStrLn "it was not a default"
This isn't a particularly idiomatic deployment of PatternSynonyms
though. I'd probably stick with Haskell 98, using a very-slightly-more-verbose guard clause with an equality test.
data A = A Int deriving Eq
defaultA = A 3
isDefaultA a
| a == defaultA = putStrLn "it was a default"
| otherwise = putStrLn "it was not a default"
Where pattern synonyms do come in useful is for wrapping up noisy library constructor calls imposed on you when you're doing datatype-generic programming with a pattern like free monads or Data Types a la Carte.
{-# LANGUAGE PatternSynonyms #-}
{-# LANGUAGE TypeOperators #-}
-- fixed point of functor
newtype Expr f = In (f (Expr f))
-- functor coproduct
data (f :+: g) a = Inl (f a) | Inr (g a)
-- now plug in custom code
data Add r = Add_ r r
data Val r = Val_ Int
type HuttonsRazor = Expr (Add :+: Val)
pattern Add x y = In (Inl (Add_ x y))
pattern Val x = In (Inr (Val_ x))
eval :: HuttonsRazor -> Int
eval (Add x y) = eval x + eval y
eval (Val x) = x
If you love us? You can donate to us via Paypal or buy me a coffee so we can maintain and grow! Thank you!
Donate Us With