Fl4m3Ph03n1x

Fl4m3Ph03n1x

Option type compatible with comprehensions in Elixr?

Background

I am trying to up my Functional Programming (FP) skills and one of the things that newcomers first learn in FP is the Option Type (aka, Maybe Monad).

Option what?

This construct is present in many languages, Haskell has Maybe and Java and Python (yes, Python!) have Optional.

Basically this type models a value that may or may not be there.

How it all comes down to Elixir

Most FP languages have comprehensions, Scala and Elixir have the for construct while Haskell has its famous do notation.

In Scala and Haskell, these comprehensions work not only with Enumerables (such as Lists) but also with our Option type (which is not an enumerable).

I mention this, because according to my understanding, Elixir’s comprehensions only works on Enumerables. Furthermore, as far as I know, there is not Option type datastructure in Elixir.

What does Elixir have?

Elixir has tagged tuples in the form of {:ok, val} or {:error, reason}. Now while Elixir comprehensions can pattern match with tagged tuples:

iex> values = [good: 1, good: 2, bad: 3, good: 4]
iex> for {:good, n} <- values, do: n * n
[1, 4, 16]

It also ignores values that do not pattern match:

iex> values = [good: 1, good: 2, bad: 3, good: 4]
iex> for {:bananas, n} <- values, do: n * n
[]

However, this does not replicate the behaviour of the Option type correctly. Following is an example in Scala:

  for {
      validName  <- validateName(name)
      validEnd   <- validateEnd(end)
      validStart <- validateStart(start, end)
    } yield Event(validName, validStart, validEnd)

Having in mind this signatures:

def validateName(name: String): Option[String]
def validateEnd(end: Int): Option[Int]
def validateStart(start: Int, end: Int): Option[Int] 

The result of the full comprehension expression, should any function return None , will be None.

With Elixir, the bad result would be ignored and the pipeline would simply continue happily ever after.

Questions

At this point I am thinking that implement this Option type as a structure that implements the Enumerable Protocol (so it can be used in Elixir comprehensions) is something that should be possible.

However, I am not sure I want to go down that route if I can simulate similar behavior using tuples.

So I have the following questions:

  1. Is it possible to simulate the Option type using tagged tuples inside Elixir comprehensions?
  2. Are there any Elixir libraries in the wild that have Monadic types (like the one we saw here) usable within Elixir comprehensions? (I know about witchcraft but they have their own construct for comprehensions, which for the time being, I think is a little overkill. I am interesting in something that works with Elixir’s native comprehension functionality).

Marked As Solved

Fl4m3Ph03n1x

Fl4m3Ph03n1x

Answer

After searching for all the functional libraries Elixir has on hex, at the time of this writing none matched my main requirement:

  • Being usable with Elixir comprehensions.

Some say Elixir comprehensions are not powerful enough for such cases. This is a falsifiable claim, so I decided to go ahead and try to falsify it.

Say Hi to Option.ex

Yes, the name is not inspiring. Originality has never been my forté.
But what is this?

Simply put, this is an option type for elixir, aka, Option/Maybe monad. Yes, another one.

And just like what most people coming from languages like Scala/Haskell/Python have come to know, it has a couple of subtypes Some and None.

option.ex

defmodule Option do
  @type t(elem) :: __MODULE__.Some.t(elem) | __MODULE__.None.t()

  defmodule Some do
    @type t(elem) :: %__MODULE__{val: elem}

    defstruct [:val]

    defimpl Collectable do
      @impl Collectable
      def into(option), do: {option, fn acc, _command -> {:done, acc} end}
    end

    defimpl Enumerable do
      @impl Enumerable
      def count(_some), do: {:ok, 1}

      @impl Enumerable
      def member?(some, element), do: {:ok, some.val == element}

      @impl Enumerable
      def reduce(some, acc, fun)

      def reduce(_some, {:halt, acc}, _fun), do: {:halted, acc}
      def reduce(some, {:suspend, acc}, fun), do: {:suspended, acc, &reduce(some, &1, fun)}
      def reduce([], {:cont, acc}, _fun), do: {:done, acc}

      def reduce(%Option.Some{} = some, {:cont, acc}, fun),
        do: reduce([], fun.(some.val, acc), fun)

      @impl Enumerable
      def slice(_option), do: {:error, __MODULE__}
    end
  end

  defmodule None do
    @type t :: %__MODULE__{}

    defstruct []

    defimpl Collectable do
      @impl Collectable
      def into(option) do
        {option,
         fn
           _acc, {:cont, val} ->
             %Option.Some{val: val}

           acc, :done ->
             acc

           _acc, :halt ->
             :ok
         end}
      end
    end

    defimpl Enumerable do
      @impl Enumerable
      def count(_none), do: {:error, __MODULE__}

      @impl Enumerable
      def member?(_none, _element), do: {:error, __MODULE__}

      @impl Enumerable
      def reduce(none, acc, fun)

      def reduce(_none, {:cont, acc}, _fun), do: {:done, acc}
      def reduce(_none, {:halt, acc}, _fun), do: {:halted, acc}
      def reduce(none, {:suspend, acc}, fun), do: {:suspended, acc, &reduce(none, &1, fun)}

      @impl Enumerable
      def slice(_option), do: {:error, __MODULE__}
    end
  end

  @spec new(any) :: __MODULE__.Some.t(any)
  def new(val), do: %__MODULE__.Some{val: val}

  @spec new :: __MODULE__.None.t()
  def new, do: %__MODULE__.None{}
end

This works with Elixir comprehensions, and it makes use of the fact that the Optional type is a Functor. This means its main requirement is being able to be mapped over. By converting an abstract container into specific implementation detail (like lists in Elixir) I was able to make it work.

How can I use it?

The main purpose of this was to add an Option type to elixir to use with comprehensions. So a comparison to other languages is useful:

In Scala:

def parseShow(rawShow: String): Option[TvShow] = {
  for {
    name <- extractName(rawShow)
    yearStart <- extractYearStart(rawShow)
    yearEnd <- extractYearEnd(rawShow)
  } yield TvShow(name, yearEnd, yearStart)
}

In Elixir:

  @spec parse_show(String.t()) :: Option.t(TvShow.t())
  def parse_show(raw_show) do
    for name <- extract_name(raw_show),
        year_start <- extract_year_start(raw_show),
        year_end <- extract_year_end(raw_show),
        into: Option.new() do
      %TvShow{name: name, year_end: year_end, year_start: year_start}
    end
  end

You will see, these two pieces of code are basically identical, with the exception of the line into: Option.new(), which is implicit in the Scala example. Elixir requires it to be explicit, which I personally prefer as well.

I could go on with examples from other languages, but they would all read basically the same. This is because comprehensions are basically the same in most FP languages.

But this doesn’t answer the full original post …

What about an Elixir equivalent in tagged tuples?

You can’t use tagged tuples to achieve the same thing using comprehensions. This is impossible.
However, if we discard comprehensions and focus on Elixir’s other constructs, we can come a little bit closer.

Quoting another prominent member of our community, @OvermindDL1 :

Is it possible to simulate the Option type using tagged tuples inside Elixir comprehensions?

Yes, or with with if you want an else, but you’ll want to make the tagged typed be ok: value and error: reason (which is closer to a result type, but it’s a limitation of elixir tuple lists in that they are always tuples). Traditionally {:ok, value} and :error is the “option” type in Elixir, where {:ok, value} and {:error, reason} is the “result” type in Elixir.

So, if you are coming from a different setting, from a functional language into Elixir, this post and my option.ex is most certainly going to help you.

If however, you’d rather stay away from Mathematical Categories and other functional concepts like you want to stay away from the plague, with statements with other elixir’s constructs ought to serve you well enough.

One is not better than the other, they have different costs/benefits. It’s up to you.

Also Liked

al2o3cr

al2o3cr

Instead of trying to force H-M types into tagged tuples (which they fit most of the time, but not always), what about using a type that already plays nice with Enumerable: a single-element list?

  • Some(A) is then represented by [A]
  • None is represented by []
LostKobrakai

LostKobrakai

I’m personally not a big fan of how monads are always tought boundled with their specific syntax in language XY. Many monads would be considered way less magicy if people actually tought the idea unrelated to syntax, because as you said a option monad in elixir is usually just a {:ok, term} | {:error, term} tuple, but handled with a bunch of explicit case statements. You can see similarities between Functors and Enum.map.

Generally if you want to have for work with “maybe” in elixir I’d just do this:

for result <- list do
  case result do
    {:ok, x} -> handle_x(x)
    err -> err
  end
end
gregvaughn

gregvaughn

At risk of going off on a tangent, let me point out that the type system of Erlang (and BEAM) pre-date Scala/F#/Haskell. It was developed in industry, not academia. The creators did not set out to create a functional language, but it happened to meet their requirements best, so that’s what we got.

I’m impressed with the levels of static typing people have been able to achieve, but at a fundamental level there will be mismatches with BEAM-level types because the language designers made different design tradeoffs originally.

This doesn’t help with your specific question(s), but perhaps it will help to moderate your expectations of what is possible/practical and when to expect compromises.

ouven

ouven

Hi, I have strong Scala background, but I never missed the for comprehensions or the option type.
Instead I use more pattern matching to solve those problems. So a Scala for comprehension with multiple generators becomes a with statement in my elixir solution space.

al2o3cr

al2o3cr

Some trivial macros can tidy this up a little, if you’re so inclined:

defmodule Blargh do
  defmacro some(x), do: [x]

  defmacro none(), do: []
end

defmodule BlarghTest do
  import Blargh

  def foo(x) do
    case x do
      some(value) -> some(2*value)
      none() -> none()
    end
  end
end

Where Next?

Popular in Questions Top

lastday4you
I wanted to check elixir version in phoenix because i found that my elixir is 1.5 but when i use Enum.chunk_by it said the function is un...
New
LegitStack
I’m hoping you guys can give me some general advice and perhaps code examples if you’re feeling up to it. I’m very interested in Elixir,...
New
tduccuong
Hi, is there any work on GUI with Elixir, that is similar to Electron/Javascript? My idea is to bundle Phoenix and BEAM into a single se...
New
mgjohns61585
Could someone help me? I'm making my first elixir program, number guessing game. I can't figure out how to convert the user's guess from ...
New
chensan
I have a User schema with a :from_id field set to type :string: defmodule TweetBot.Repo.Migrations.CreateUsers do use Ecto.Migration ...
New
stefanluptak
Hello everybody, usually, I use a 29" ultra-wide monitor for VSCode which can easily accomodate explorer (files panel) + file with code ...
New
Exadra37
Sometimes I want to check if the input into a function is not a blank string. My first approach: defmodule Example do def do_stuff(s...
New
beno
I will often find my self writing things similar to: case some_value do nil -&gt; something() "" -&gt; something() _ -&gt; someth...
New
jc00ke
Expanding on this topic: https://forum.elixirforum.net/t/map-typespec-question/19217 Let’s say I have a map with required and optional k...
New
jay1
Why is it that the mnesia database isn’t the most preferred database for use in Elixir/Phoenix?
New

Other popular topics Top

Harrisonl
We have an ECS cluster with 4 services, where each task joins a single cluster, via discovery ECS discovery service. Currently when I de...
New
JakeBecker
TL;DR: I’ve just released an implementation of Microsoft’s IDE-independent Language Server Protocol for Elixir. It adds language support ...
1140 51847 244
New
senggen
Erlang/OTP 25 [erts-13.2.2] [source] [64-bit] [smp:8:8] [ds:8:8:10] [async-threads:1] 15:22:35.803 [error] gen_event {lager_file_backend...
New
dotdotdotPaul
Okay, I'm having a heck of a time trying to figure out how to best handle the validation of belongs_to associations in Ecto. I'm sure I'...
New
William
I would like to know that is there any online source for learning Phoenix Framework for building E-Commerce Store? Any advantage on build...
New
aalberti333
As the title describes, I’m trying to run Enum.map() over a list of key/value pairs, where the value is a map. My data looks like this: ...
New
chrismccord
This release brings a number of exciting features, including integration with the new Phoenix LiveDashboard and Phoenix LiveView. There h...
New
vertexbuffer
Hello, can anybody help here..? I have a list of players and I what to delete an element, but every for loop the list is reverting to ori...
New
mcarvalho
What is the difference between System.get_env and Application.get_env? For example, what are best practices to use one versus another.
New
lucidguppy
I have a super simple question about elixir - how would I take a file like this foo bar baz and output a new file that enumerates th...
New

We're in Beta

About us Mission Statement