Wrangling TryWith in Computation expressions - f#

(Having failed to 'grok' FParsec, I followed the advice I read somewhere and started trying to write a little parser myself. Somehow I spotted what looked like a chance to try and monadify it, and now I have N problems...)
This is my 'Result' type (simplified)
type Result<'a> =
| Success of 'a
| Failure of string
Here's the computation expression builder
type ResultBuilder() =
member m.Return a = Success(a)
member m.Bind(r,fn) =
match r with
| Success(a) -> fn a
| Failure(m) -> Failure(m)
In this first example, everything works (compiles) as expected:
module Parser =
let res = ResultBuilder()
let Combine p1 p2 fn =
fun a -> res { let! x = p1 a
let! y = p2 a
return fn(x,y) }
My problem is here: I'd like to be able to catch any failure in the 'combining' function and return a failure, but it says that I should define a 'Zero'.
let Combine2 p1 p2 fn =
fun a -> res { let! x = p1 a
let! y = p2 a
try
return fn(x,y)
with
| ex -> Failure(ex.Message) }
Having no idea what I should return in a Zero, I just threw in member m.Zero() = Failure("hello world"), and it now says I need TryWith.
So:
member m.TryWith(r,fn) =
try
r()
with
| ex -> fn ex
And now it wants Delay, so member m.Delay f = (fun () -> f()).
At which point it says (on the ex -> Failure), This expression should have type 'unit', but has type 'Result<'a>', and I throw up my arms and turn to you guys...
Link for playing: http://dotnetfiddle.net/Ho1sGS

The with block should also return a result from the computation expression. Since you want to return Result.Failure you need to define the member m.ReturnFrom a = a and use it to return the Failure from the with block. In the try block you should also specify that fn returns Success if it doesn't throw.
let Combine2 p1 p2 fn =
fun a -> res { let! x = p1 a
let! y = p2 a
return!
try
Success(fn(x,y))
with
| ex -> Failure(ex.Message)
}
Update:
The original implementation was showing a warning, not an error. The expression in the with block was not used since you returned from the try block, so you could simply add |> ignore. In that case if fn throws then the return value is m.Zero() and the only difference is that you would get "hello world" instead of ex.Message. Illustrated with an example below. Full script here: http://dotnetfiddle.net/mFbeZg
Original implementation with |> ignore to mute the warning:
let Combine3 p1 p2 fn =
fun a -> res { let! x = p1 a
let! y = p2 a
try
return fn(x,y)
with
| ex -> Failure(ex.Message) |> ignore // no warning
}
Run it:
let comb2 a =
let p1' x = Success(x)
let p2' y = Success(y)
let fn' (x,y) = 1/0 // div by zero
let func = Parser.Combine2 p1' p2' fn' a
func()
let comb3 a =
let p1' x = Success(x)
let p2' y = Success(y)
let fn' (x,y) = 1/0 // div by zero
let func = Parser.Combine3 p1' p2' fn' a
func()
let test2 = comb2 1
let test3 = comb3 1
Result:
val test2 : Result<int> = Failure "Attempted to divide by zero."
val test3 : Result<int> = Failure "hello world"

If you want to support try ... with inside a computation builder, you need to add TryWith (as you tried) as well as a few other members including Delay and Run (depending on how you want to implement Delay). In order to be able to return failure, you also need to support return! by adding ReturnFrom:
type ResultBuilder() =
member m.Return a = Success(a)
member m.Bind(r,fn) =
match r with
| Success(a) -> fn a
| Failure(m) -> Failure(m)
member m.TryWith(r,fn) =
try r() with ex -> fn ex
member m.Delay(f) = f
member m.Run(f) = f()
member m.ReturnFrom(r) = r
Now you can do the following:
let Combine2 p1 p2 fn = fun a -> res {
let! x = p1 a
let! y = p2 a
try
return fn(x,y)
with ex ->
return! Failure(ex.Message) }
The trick is that the normal branch uses just return (representing success), but the exception handler uses return! to return an explicitly created result using Failure.
That said, if you are interested in parsers, then you need to use a different type - what you are describing here is more like the option (or Maybe) monad. To implement parser combinators you need a type that represents a parser rather than result of a parser. See for example this article.

Related

FSharp Computation Expression: Cannot reference binding value in custom operation

I am trying to make a builder using FSharp Computation Expression, but get error FS0039:
type UpdatebBuilder() =
member this.Yield (x) = x
member this.Return (x) = x
member this.Bind (x, cont) = cont(x)
member this.Quote (x) = x
member this.For (x, a) = x
[<CustomOperation("set", MaintainsVariableSpace =true,AllowIntoPattern=true)>]
member this.Set (x, a, b) = x
let update = UpdatebBuilder()
let testUpdate () =
update {
for x in [| 1; 2 ; 3|] do
set x 123 // Compile Error FS0039: The value or constructor 'x' is not defined.
}
What I want to implement is something like query expression:
query {
for x in collection do
where x = 2 // Why no FS0039 error here?
select x
}
Also tried MaintainsVariableSpaceUsingBind=true, and get same error. What should I do to make it compile?
To me it looks like you are trying to define a State monad and implementing the Set operation as a custom operation.
I will admit I never fully got my head around custom operations in F# (and I used F# alot). IMHO it feels like custom operations had one purpose; enable a LINQ like syntax in F#. As time goes in it seems few C# developers are using the LINQ like syntax (ie from x where y select z) and few F# developers are using the query computation expression. I have no data here but just goes from example code I see.
This could explain why the documentation on custom operations are often succinct and hard to grasp. What does this even mean? MaintainsVariableSpaceUsingBind: Indicates if the custom operation maintains the variable space of the query or computation expression through the use of a bind operation.
Anyway, so in order to learn a bit more about custom operations I tried to implement the state monad with a custom operation for set and I got a bit farther but ran into a problem which I think is an intentional limitation of the compiler. Still thought I share it with the hope that it helps OP get a bit further.
I chose this definition for State<_>:
type [<Struct>] State<'T> = S of (Map<string, obj> -> 'T*Map<string, obj>)
State<_> is a function that given a global state (a map) produces a value (that could derive from the global state but not necessarily) and a potentially updated global state.
return or value as I tend to call it as return is an F# keyword is easy to define as we just return v and the non-updated global state:
let value v = S <| fun m -> v, m
bind is useful to bind several state computations together. First run t on the global state and from the returned value create the second computation and run the updated global state through it:
let bind uf (S t) = S <| fun m ->
let tv, tm = t m
let (S u) = uf tv
u tm
get and set are used to interact with the global state:
let get k : State<'T option> = S <| fun m ->
match m |> Map.tryFind k with
| Some (:? 'T as v) -> Some v, m
| _ -> None, m
let set k v = S <| fun m ->
let m = m |> Map.add k (box v)
(), m
I created some other methods as well but in the end the builder was created like this:
type Builder() =
class
member x.Bind (t, uf) = bind uf t
member x.Combine (t, u) = combine u t
member x.Delay tf = delay tf
member x.For (s, tf) = forEach s tf
member x.Return v = value v
member x.ReturnFrom t = t : State<'T>
member x.Yield v = value v
member x.Zero () = value ()
[<CustomOperation("set", MaintainsVariableSpaceUsingBind = true)>]
member x.Set (s, k, v) = s |> combine (set k v)
end
I used MaintainsVariableSpaceUsingBind because otherwise it doesn't see v. MaintainsVariableSpace yields strange errors asking for seq types which I vaguely suspect is an optimization for computations based around seq. Checking the generated code is seems to do the right thing in that it binds the custom operations together using my bind function in the proper order.
I am now ready to do define a state computation
state {
// Works fine
set "key" -1
for v in 0..2 do
// Won't work because: FS3086: A custom operation may not be used in conjunction with 'use', 'try/with', 'try/finally', 'if/then/else' or 'match' operators within this computation expression
set "hello" v
return! State.get "key"
}
Unfortunately the compiler stops me from using custom ops in conditional operations like if, try and also for (even though it's not in the list it's conditional in some sense). This seems to be an intentional limitation. It's possible to workaround it but it feels meh
state {
set "key" -1
for v in 0..2 do
// Meh
do! state { set "key" v }
return! State.get "key"
}
IMHO I prefer just using normal do!/let! over custom operations:
state {
for v in 0..2 do
do! State.set "key" v
return! State.get "key"
}
So not really a proper answer to the question from OP but perhaps it can help you get a bit further?
Full source code:
type [<Struct>] State<'T> = S of (Map<string, obj> -> 'T*Map<string, obj>)
module State =
let value v = S <| fun m -> v, m
let bind uf (S t) = S <| fun m ->
let tv, tm = t m
let (S u) = uf tv
u tm
let combine u (S t) = S <| fun m ->
let _, tm = t m
let (S u) = u
u tm
let delay tf = S <| fun m ->
let (S t) = tf ()
t m
let forEach s tf = S <| fun m ->
let mutable a = m
for v in s do
let (S t) = tf v
let (), tm = t m
a <- tm
(), a
let get k : State<'T option> = S <| fun m ->
match m |> Map.tryFind k with
| Some (:? 'T as v) -> Some v, m
| _ -> None, m
let set k v = S <| fun m ->
let m = m |> Map.add k (box v)
(), m
let run (S t) m = t m
type Builder() =
class
member x.Bind (t, uf) = bind uf t
member x.Combine (t, u) = combine u t
member x.Delay tf = delay tf
member x.For (s, tf) = forEach s tf
member x.Return v = value v
member x.ReturnFrom t = t : State<'T>
member x.Yield v = value v
member x.Zero () = value ()
[<CustomOperation("set", MaintainsVariableSpaceUsingBind = true)>]
member x.Set (s, k, v) = s |> combine (set k v)
end
let state = State.Builder ()
let testUpdate () =
state {
// Works fine
set "key" -1
for v in 0..2 do
// Won't work because: FS3086: A custom operation may not be used in conjunction with 'use', 'try/with', 'try/finally', 'if/then/else' or 'match' operators within this computation expression
// set "hello" v
// Workaround but kind of meh
// do! state { set "key" v }
// Better IMHO
do! State.set "key" v
return! State.get "key"
}
[<EntryPoint>]
let main argv =
let tv, tm = State.run (testUpdate ()) Map.empty
printfn "v:%A" tv
printfn "m:%A" tm
0

How to make a lazy computational workflow?

I'm trying to write a computational workflow which would allow a computation which can produce side effects like log or sleep and a return value
A usage example would be something like this
let add x y =
compute {
do! log (sprintf "add: x = %d, y= %d" x y)
do! sleep 1000
let r = x + y
do! log (sprintf "add: result= %d" r)
return r
}
...
let result = run (add 100 1000)
and I would like the side effects to be produced when executeComputation is called.
My attempt is
type Effect =
| Log of string
| Sleep of int
type Computation<'t> = Computation of Lazy<'t * Effect list>
let private bind (u : 'u, effs : Effect list)
(f : 'u -> 'v * Effect list)
: ('v * Effect list) =
let v, newEffs = f u
let allEffects = List.append effs newEffs
v, allEffects
type ComputeBuilder() =
member this.Zero() = lazy ((), [])
member this.Return(x) = x, []
member this.ReturnFrom(Computation f) = f.Force()
member this.Bind(x, f) = bind x f
member this.Delay(funcToDelay) = funcToDelay
member this.Run(funcToRun) = Computation (lazy funcToRun())
let compute = new ComputeBuilder()
let log msg = (), [Log msg]
let sleep ms = (), [Sleep ms]
let run (Computation x) = x.Force()
...but the compiler complains about the let! lines in the following code:
let x =
compute {
let! a = add 10 20
let! b = add 11 2000
return a + b
}
Error FS0001: This expression was expected to have type
'a * Effect list
but here has type
Computation<'b> (FS0001)
Any suggestions?
The main thing that is not right with your definition is that some of the members of the computation builder use your Computation<'T> type and some of the other members use directly a pair of value and list of effects.
To make it type check, you need to be consistent. The following version uses Computation<'T> everywhere - have a look at the type signature of Bind, for example:
let private bind (Computation c) f : Computation<_> =
Computation(Lazy.Create(fun () ->
let u, effs = c.Value
let (Computation(c2)) = f u
let v, newEffs = c2.Value
let allEffects = List.append effs newEffs
v, allEffects))
type ComputeBuilder() =
member this.Zero() = Computation(lazy ((), []))
member this.Return(x) = Computation(lazy (x, []))
member this.ReturnFrom(c) = c
member this.Bind(x, f) = bind x f
member this.Delay(funcToDelay:_ -> Computation<_>) =
Computation(Lazy.Create(fun () ->
let (Computation(r)) = funcToDelay()
r.Value))

How do I write a computation expression builder that accumulates a value and also allows standard language constructs?

I have a computation expression builder that builds up a value as you go, and has many custom operations. However, it does not allow for standard F# language constructs, and I'm having a lot of trouble figuring out how to add this support.
To give a stand-alone example, here's a dead-simple and fairly pointless computation expression that builds F# lists:
type Items<'a> = Items of 'a list
type ListBuilder() =
member x.Yield(()) = Items []
[<CustomOperation("add")>]
member x.Add(Items current, item:'a) =
Items [ yield! current; yield item ]
[<CustomOperation("addMany")>]
member x.AddMany(Items current, items: seq<'a>) =
Items [ yield! current; yield! items ]
let listBuilder = ListBuilder()
let build (Items items) = items
I can use this to build lists just fine:
let stuff =
listBuilder {
add 1
add 5
add 7
addMany [ 1..10 ]
add 42
}
|> build
However, this is a compiler error:
listBuilder {
let x = 5 * 39
add x
}
// This expression was expected to have type unit, but
// here has type int.
And so is this:
listBuilder {
for x = 1 to 50 do
add x
}
// This control construct may only be used if the computation expression builder
// defines a For method.
I've read all the documentation and examples I can find, but there's something I'm just not getting. Every .Bind() or .For() method signature I try just leads to more and more confusing compiler errors. Most of the examples I can find either build up a value as you go along, or allow for regular F# language constructs, but I haven't been able to find one that does both.
If someone could point me in the right direction by showing me how to take this example and add support in the builder for let bindings and for loops (at minimum - using, while and try/catch would be great, but I can probably figure those out if someone gets me started) then I'll be able to gratefully apply the lesson to my actual problem.
The best place to look is the spec. For example,
b {
let x = e
op x
}
gets translated to
T(let x = e in op x, [], fun v -> v, true)
=> T(op x, {x}, fun v -> let x = e in v, true)
=> [| op x, let x = e in b.Yield(x) |]{x}
=> b.Op(let x = e in in b.Yield(x), x)
So this shows where things have gone wrong, though it doesn't present an obvious solution. Clearly, Yield needs to be generalized since it needs to take arbitrary tuples (based on how many variables are in scope). Perhaps more subtly, it also shows that x is not in scope in the call to add (see that unbound x as the second argument to b.Op?). To allow your custom operators to use bound variables, their arguments need to have the [<ProjectionParameter>] attribute (and take functions from arbitrary variables as arguments), and you'll also need to set MaintainsVariableSpace to true if you want bound variables to be available to later operators. This will change the final translation to:
b.Op(let x = e in b.Yield(x), fun x -> x)
Building up from this, it seems that there's no way to avoid passing the set of bound values along to and from each operation (though I'd love to be proven wrong) - this will require you to add a Run method to strip those values back off at the end. Putting it all together, you'll get a builder which looks like this:
type ListBuilder() =
member x.Yield(vars) = Items [],vars
[<CustomOperation("add",MaintainsVariableSpace=true)>]
member x.Add((Items current,vars), [<ProjectionParameter>]f) =
Items (current # [f vars]),vars
[<CustomOperation("addMany",MaintainsVariableSpace=true)>]
member x.AddMany((Items current, vars), [<ProjectionParameter>]f) =
Items (current # f vars),vars
member x.Run(l,_) = l
The most complete examples I've seen are in §6.3.10 of the spec, especially this one:
/// Computations that can cooperatively yield by returning a continuation
type Eventually<'T> =
| Done of 'T
| NotYetDone of (unit -> Eventually<'T>)
[<CompilationRepresentation(CompilationRepresentationFlags.ModuleSuffix)>]
module Eventually =
/// The bind for the computations. Stitch 'k' on to the end of the computation.
/// Note combinators like this are usually written in the reverse way,
/// for example,
/// e |> bind k
let rec bind k e =
match e with
| Done x -> NotYetDone (fun () -> k x)
| NotYetDone work -> NotYetDone (fun () -> bind k (work()))
/// The return for the computations.
let result x = Done x
type OkOrException<'T> =
| Ok of 'T
| Exception of System.Exception
/// The catch for the computations. Stitch try/with throughout
/// the computation and return the overall result as an OkOrException.
let rec catch e =
match e with
| Done x -> result (Ok x)
| NotYetDone work ->
NotYetDone (fun () ->
let res = try Ok(work()) with | e -> Exception e
match res with
| Ok cont -> catch cont // note, a tailcall
| Exception e -> result (Exception e))
/// The delay operator.
let delay f = NotYetDone (fun () -> f())
/// The stepping action for the computations.
let step c =
match c with
| Done _ -> c
| NotYetDone f -> f ()
// The rest of the operations are boilerplate.
/// The tryFinally operator.
/// This is boilerplate in terms of "result", "catch" and "bind".
let tryFinally e compensation =
catch (e)
|> bind (fun res -> compensation();
match res with
| Ok v -> result v
| Exception e -> raise e)
/// The tryWith operator.
/// This is boilerplate in terms of "result", "catch" and "bind".
let tryWith e handler =
catch e
|> bind (function Ok v -> result v | Exception e -> handler e)
/// The whileLoop operator.
/// This is boilerplate in terms of "result" and "bind".
let rec whileLoop gd body =
if gd() then body |> bind (fun v -> whileLoop gd body)
else result ()
/// The sequential composition operator
/// This is boilerplate in terms of "result" and "bind".
let combine e1 e2 =
e1 |> bind (fun () -> e2)
/// The using operator.
let using (resource: #System.IDisposable) f =
tryFinally (f resource) (fun () -> resource.Dispose())
/// The forLoop operator.
/// This is boilerplate in terms of "catch", "result" and "bind".
let forLoop (e:seq<_>) f =
let ie = e.GetEnumerator()
tryFinally (whileLoop (fun () -> ie.MoveNext())
(delay (fun () -> let v = ie.Current in f v)))
(fun () -> ie.Dispose())
// Give the mapping for F# computation expressions.
type EventuallyBuilder() =
member x.Bind(e,k) = Eventually.bind k e
member x.Return(v) = Eventually.result v
member x.ReturnFrom(v) = v
member x.Combine(e1,e2) = Eventually.combine e1 e2
member x.Delay(f) = Eventually.delay f
member x.Zero() = Eventually.result ()
member x.TryWith(e,handler) = Eventually.tryWith e handler
member x.TryFinally(e,compensation) = Eventually.tryFinally e compensation
member x.For(e:seq<_>,f) = Eventually.forLoop e f
member x.Using(resource,e) = Eventually.using resource e
The tutorial at "F# for fun and profit" is first class in this regard.
http://fsharpforfunandprofit.com/posts/computation-expressions-intro/
Following a similar struggle to Joel's (and not finding §6.3.10 of the spec that helpful) my issue with getting the For construct to generate a list came down to getting types to line up properly (no special attributes required). In particular I was slow to realise that For would build a list of lists, and therefore need flattening, despite the best efforts of the compiler to put me right. Examples that I found on the web were always wrappers around seq{}, using the yield keyword, repeated use of which invokes a call to Combine, which does the flattening. In case a concrete example helps, the following excerpt uses for to build a list of integers - my ultimate aim being to create lists of components for rendering in a GUI (with some additional laziness thrown in). Also In depth talk on CE here which elaborates on kvb's points above.
module scratch
type Dispatcher = unit -> unit
type viewElement = int
type lazyViews = Lazy<list<viewElement>>
type ViewElementsBuilder() =
member x.Return(views: lazyViews) : list<viewElement> = views.Value
member x.Yield(v: viewElement) : list<viewElement> = [v]
member x.ReturnFrom(viewElements: list<viewElement>) = viewElements
member x.Zero() = list<viewElement>.Empty
member x.Combine(listA:list<viewElement>, listB: list<viewElement>) = List.concat [listA; listB]
member x.Delay(f) = f()
member x.For(coll:seq<'a>, forBody: 'a -> list<viewElement>) : list<viewElement> =
// seq {for v in coll do yield! f v} |> List.ofSeq
Seq.map forBody coll |> Seq.collect id |> List.ofSeq
let ve = new ViewElementsBuilder()
let makeComponent(m: int, dispatch: Dispatcher) : viewElement = m
let makeComponents() : list<viewElement> = [77; 33]
let makeViewElements() : list<viewElement> =
let model = {| Scores = [33;23;22;43;] |> Seq.ofList; Trainer = "John" |}
let d:Dispatcher = fun() -> () // Does nothing here, but will be used to raise messages from UI
ve {
for score in model.Scores do
yield makeComponent (score, d)
yield makeComponent (score * 100 / 50 , d)
if model.Trainer = "John" then
return lazy
[ makeComponent (12, d)
makeComponent (13, d)
]
else
return lazy
[ makeComponent (14, d)
makeComponent (15, d)
]
yield makeComponent (33, d)
return! makeComponents()
}

F# compose pattern matched function

I have these types:
type ShouldRetry = ShouldRetry of (RetryCount * LastException -> bool * RetryDelay)
and RetryCount = int
and LastException = exn
and RetryDelay = TimeSpan
type RetryPolicy = RetryPolicy of ShouldRetry
Now I want composability of the retries; something like this:
let serverOverloaded = [| exnRetry<TimeoutException>;
exnRetry<ServerBusyException> |]
|> Array.map (fun fn -> fn (TimeSpan.FromSeconds(4.0)))
let badNetwork = [||] // etc
let compose p1 p2 =
// http://fssnip.net/7h
RetryPolicy(ShouldRetry( (fun (c,e) ->
let RetryPolicy(ShouldRetry(fn)) = p1
let RetryPolicy(ShouldRetry(fn')) = p2
let (cont, delay) = fn c,e
if cont then cont, delay
else
let (cont', delay') = fn' c,e
cont', delay') ))
let finalPolicy = serverOverloaded |> Array.scan compose (RetryPolicies.NoRetry())
But I'm getting compiler errors on fn, delay and fn', saying "The value or constructor 'fn' is not defined".
I can see two problems in your compose function.
When decomposing p1 and p2, the pattern needs to be wrapped in parentheses (otherwise, the compiler interprets the code as a definition of RetryPolicy function, instead of pattern matching):
let (RetryPolicy(ShouldRetry(fn))) = p1
let (RetryPolicy(ShouldRetry(fn'))) = p2
When calling fn' a bit later, you need to pass it the arguments in a tuple (otherwise, the compiler thinks that you're calling fn' with just a single argument c and then building a tuple):
let (cont', delay') = fn' (c,e)
I didn't check (or tried to run) the whole example, so I don't know if the rest of the code does what you want.

How do you create an F# workflow that enables something like single-stepping?

I'd like to create a builder that builds expressions that returns something like a continuation after each step.
Something like this:
module TwoSteps =
let x = stepwise {
let! y = "foo"
printfn "got: %A" y
let! z = y + "bar"
printfn "got: %A" z
return z
}
printfn "two steps"
let a = x()
printfn "something inbetween"
let b = a()
Where the 'let a' line returns something containing the rest of the expressions to be evaluated later on.
Doing this with a separate type for each number of steps is straightforward but of course not particularly useful:
type Stepwise() =
let bnd (v: 'a) rest = fun () -> rest v
let rtn v = fun () -> Some v
member x.Bind(v, rest) =
bnd v rest
member x.Return v = rtn v
let stepwise = Stepwise()
module TwoSteps =
let x = stepwise {
let! y = "foo"
printfn "got: %A" y
let! z = y + "bar"
printfn "got: %A" z
return z
}
printfn "two steps"
let a = x()
printfn "something inbetween"
let b = a()
module ThreeSteps =
let x = stepwise {
let! y = "foo"
printfn "got: %A" y
let! z = y + "bar"
printfn "got: %A" z
let! z' = z + "third"
printfn "got: %A" z'
return z
}
printfn "three steps"
let a = x()
printfn "something inbetween"
let b = a()
printfn "something inbetween"
let c = b()
And the results are what I'm looking for:
two steps
got: "foo"
something inbetween
got: "foobar"
three steps
got: "foo"
something inbetween
got: "foobar"
something inbetween
got: "foobarthird"
But I can't figure out what the general case of this would be.
What I'd like is to be able to feed events into this workflow, so you could write something like:
let someHandler = Stepwise<someMergedEventStream>() {
let! touchLocation = swallowEverythingUntilYouGetATouch()
startSomeSound()
let! nextTouchLocation = swallowEverythingUntilYouGetATouch()
stopSomeSound()
}
And have events trigger a move to the next step in the workflow. (In particular, I want to play with this sort of thing in MonoTouch - F# on the iPhone. Passing around objc selectors drives me insane.)
the problem with your implementation is that it returns "unit -> 'a" for each call to Bind, so you'll get a different type of result for different number of steps (in general, this is a suspicious definition of monad/computation expression).
A correct solution should be to use some other type, which can represent a computation with arbitrary number of steps. You'll also need to distinguish between two types of steps - some steps just evaluate next step of the computation and some steps return a result (via the return keyword). I'll use a type seq<option<'a>>. This is a lazy sequence, so reading the next element will evaluate the next step of the computation. The sequence will contain None values with the exception of the last value, which will be Some(value), representing the result returned using return.
Another suspicious thing in your implementation is a non-standard type of Bind member. The fact that your bind takes a value as the first parameter means that your code looks a bit simpler (you can write let! a = 1) however, you cannot compose stepwise computation. You may want to be able to write:
let foo() = stepwise {
return 1; }
let bar() = stepwise {
let! a = foo()
return a + 10 }
The type I described above will allow you to write this as well. Once you have the type, you just need to follow the type signature of Bind and Return in the implementation and you'll get this:
type Stepwise() =
member x.Bind(v:seq<option<_>>, rest:(_ -> seq<option<_>>)) = seq {
let en = v.GetEnumerator()
let nextVal() =
if en.MoveNext() then en.Current
else failwith "Unexpected end!"
let last = ref (nextVal())
while Option.isNone !last do
// yield None for each step of the source 'stepwise' computation
yield None
last := next()
// yield one more None for this step
yield None
// run the rest of the computation
yield! rest (Option.get !last) }
member x.Return v = seq {
// single-step computation that yields the result
yield Some(v) }
let stepwise = Stepwise()
// simple function for creating single-step computations
let one v = stepwise.Return(v)
Now, let's look at using the type:
let oneStep = stepwise {
// NOTE: we need to explicitly create single-step
// computations when we call the let! binder
let! y = one( "foo" )
printfn "got: %A" y
return y + "bar" }
let threeSteps = stepwise {
let! x = oneStep // compose computations :-)
printfn "got: %A" x
let! y = one( x + "third" )
printfn "got: %A" y
return "returning " + y }
If you want to run the computation step-by-step, you can simply iterate over the returned sequence, for example using the F# for keyword. The following also prints the index of the step:
for step, idx in Seq.zip threeSteps [ 1 .. 10] do
printf "STEP %d: " idx
match step with
| None _ -> ()
| Some(v) -> printfn "Final result: %s" v
Hope this helps!
PS: I found this problem very interesting! Would you mind if I addapted my answer into a blog post for my blog (http://tomasp.net/blog)? Thanks!
Monads and computation builders confuse the hell out of me, but I've adapted something I've made in an earlier SO post. Maybe some bits and pieces can be of use.
The code below contains an action queue, and a form where the Click event listens to the next action available in the action queue. The code below is an example with 4 actions in succession. Execute it in FSI and start clicking the form.
open System.Collections.Generic
open System.Windows.Forms
type ActionQueue(actions: (System.EventArgs -> unit) list) =
let actions = new Queue<System.EventArgs -> unit>(actions) //'a contains event properties
with
member hq.Add(action: System.EventArgs -> unit) =
actions.Enqueue(action)
member hq.NextAction =
if actions.Count=0
then fun _ -> ()
else actions.Dequeue()
//test code
let frm = new System.Windows.Forms.Form()
let myActions = [
fun (e:System.EventArgs) -> printfn "You clicked with %A" (e :?> MouseEventArgs).Button
fun _ -> printfn "Stop clicking me!!"
fun _ -> printfn "I mean it!"
fun _ -> printfn "I'll stop talking to you now."
]
let aq = new ActionQueue(myActions)
frm.Click.Add(fun e -> aq.NextAction e)
//frm.Click now executes the 4 actions in myActions in order and then does nothing on further clicks
frm.Show()
You can click the form 4 times and then nothing happens with further clicks.
Now execute the following code, and the form will respond two more times:
let moreActions = [
fun _ -> printfn "Ok, I'll talk to you again. Just don't click anymore, ever!"
fun _ -> printfn "That's it. I'm done with you."
]
moreActions |> List.iter (aq.Add)

Resources