In Praise of EitherT

At the start of the month, Gabriel Gonzalez released the errors library for Haskell. This library is fantastic, not only for what it provides, but also for the learning it has motivated me to do. Amongst the various bits of Haskell knowledge I am on a path to understand were the EitherT/MaybeT pair of monad transformers. With a little bit of time, I’ve come to truly appreciate how powerful these can be.

I’m currently working on an implementation of the OAuth2 specification for Snap, and there is a lot of outside-world interaction. Which means there’s a lot of places things can go wrong. Parsing request parameters, looking up things in databases, checking for expiration times - these all have the possibility of failing, and most of them require some form of IO too.

My code initially had the smell of walking indentation:

grant' <- withBackend $ \be ->
            lookupAuthorizationGrant be (accessTokenCode tokenReq)
case grant' of
  Nothing -> -- handle error here
  Just grant ->
    case authGrantRedirectUri grant == accessTokenRedirect tokenReq of
      True -> do
        now <- liftIO getCurrentTime
        case now > authGrantExpiresAt grant of
          False -> do
            -- success, finally!

That’s a brief snippet of code I used to have - 6 levels of nesting until we get to the success case, where the real processing actually happens. But this code is the important part, it should be the most prominent! Everything else is just noise, and it’d be really nice if we could abstract that all away.

The EitherT monad transformer can do that. EitherT lets us lift actions from some underlying monad, and add failure semantics. My first attempt at tidying this code up was to run in EitherT and fail with a Text value, which could then be rendered back to the client:

grant' <- noteT "Authorization grant not found" .
            liftMaybe =<< liftIO =<< lift
               (withBackend' $ \be ->
                 inspectAuthorizationGrant be
                   (accessTokenReqCode tokenReq))

(authGrantRedirectUri grant == accessTokenReqRedirect tokenReq)
  `orFail` "Redirection URL must be the same"

now <- liftIO getCurrentTime
(now <= authGrantExpiresAt grant) `orFail` "This token has expired"

-- Success!

Now our success code is inline with the rest of the code, and not trailing off the screen. Further more, the error handling has been simplified and is not getting in the way. As good as that is, we’ve lost some functionality. For example, we might need to send different status codes depending on what part of validation failed, or in some cases of the OAuth specification we should change the storage depending on failed requests (such as invalidating keys).

Here’s the twist - we can make our error value an executable action. If we change our error value to be Handler b v (), we can run abritrary code on error conditions. Taking the example of expiration time:

now <- liftIO getCurrentTime
(now <= authGrantExpiresAt grant) `orFail` expiredToken
where expiredToken = do writeText "This token has expired"
                        modifyResponse (setResponseCode 400)

Now we have a huge amount of flexibility on what can happen in chains of actions that may fail. Further more, where definitions let us separate this code out into small maintainable blocks. Finally, we can introduce functions such as orFail to create what is almost a DSL for expressing rules in preparation for later actions.

EitherT has helped me make my code avoid walking indentation, and closely ties error handling to the code that could fail. I highly recommend you give EitherT and MaybeT a chance if you haven’t yet used them, if you just need some lightweight and localised error handling, it might do the trick perfectly.

You can contact me via email at or tweet to me @acid2. I share almost all of my work at GitHub. This post is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License.

I accept Bitcoin donations: 14SsYeM3dmcUxj3cLz7JBQnhNdhg7dUiJn