On 07/16/2013 05:06 PM, Tom Ellis wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 04:57:59PM -0400, Michael Orlitzky wrote:
>> This all works great, except that when there's 20 or so options, I
>> duplicate a ton of code in the definition of OptionalCfg. Is there some
>> pre-existing solution that will let me take a Cfg and create a new type
>> with Cfg's fields wrapped in Maybe?
>
> You can always try
>
> data Cfg f = Cfg { verbose :: f Bool }
>
> and set f to Maybe or Identity depending on what you use it for. It will be
> slightly notationally cumbersome to extract values from the Identity functor
> though.
>
Two votes for this approach. I'll give it a try and see whether it comes
out more or less verbose. Thanks!
_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
