Using regexp in haskell function guards

Question

I would like to write a Haskell function that's behavior is dependent upon regex pattern matching one of the arguments. In a language like C/Python/Perl, I would definitely just use a large if/else construct, but I don't really have that option. What is the most idiomatic Haskell way to handle this?

I've considered guards, but they don't work: No instance for (Data.String.IsString source0):

function arg
  | arg =~ "pattern1" = dothis arg
  | arg =~ "pattern2" = dothat arg
  | otherwise = failwith arg

The pattern matching used in case constructs would be perfect, if it handled Regex.

function arg = case arg of
  (pattern1 match) -> dothis match
  (pattern2 match) -> dothat match
  _ -> failwith arg

in the version using gaurds, you probably need explicit type annotations, something like function :: String -> ReturnType — behzad.nouri
– behzad.nouri, Commented Aug 1, 2015 at 18:51

chi · Accepted Answer · 2015-08-02 08:17:28Z

13

Your first example does work for me:

import Text.Regex.Posix

function :: String -> String
function arg
  | arg =~ "pattern1" = "1"
  | arg =~ "pattern2" = "2"
  | otherwise = "3"

I think your IsString error is due to the overloaded string literals extension. Try to disable that, or alternatively try to use explicit String strings:

function :: String -> String
function arg
  | arg =~ ("pattern1"::String) = "1"
  | arg =~ ("pattern2"::String) = "2"
  | otherwise = "3"

Too noisy? You can push the cruft to the last lines.

function2 :: String -> String
function2 arg
  | arg =~ s"pattern1" = "1"
  | arg =~ s"pattern2" = "2"
  | otherwise = "3"
  where s :: String -> String
        s = id

Need subgroup matching?

function3 :: String -> String
function3 arg
  | [_,x]:_ <- arg =~ s"pat(t*)ern1" = "matched group: " ++ x
  -- ...

On function3 "patttern1", variable x will be bound to "tt". On function3 "xyz", the test will fail and the next branch will be tried.

edited Aug 2, 2015 at 8:17

answered Aug 1, 2015 at 18:51

chi

117k4 gold badges143 silver badges230 bronze badges

Sign up to request clarification or add additional context in comments.

3 Comments

Ørjan Johansen Over a year ago

PatternGuards are standard, no pragma needed. ViewPatterns might be even closer to what OP asks for, or the even more newfangled PatternSynonyms.

chi Over a year ago

@matejcik Because the =~ has many overloads, including one returning list-of-lists, which I exploit here. I don't recall all the details, since I answered this 3 years ago, but the library docs should probably contain them.

Jeremy Over a year ago

Thank you for this answer, which was helpful! (Though for the function3 form I am always seeing that the first guard matches, even if the match is empty.)

Collectives™ on Stack Overflow

Using regexp in haskell function guards

1 Answer 1

3 Comments

Your Answer

Hot Network Questions

Collectives™ on Stack Overflow

1 Answer 1

3 Comments

Your Answer

Sign up or log in

Post as a guest

Related