[Robin_Message]

Consistent error handling is needed if you are returning 0 for success and -1 for failure. Or was it 1 for success and 0 for failure? But there's nothing wrong with a type signature that precisely describes what you can get back. Only argument I'd have with Either is it's not obvious which is the error (although left is the convention and baked into the monad), although in practice you'll be returning "Either ParseError ParseTree" which makes it rather obvious. Also, do-notation over the Maybe monad is just perfect for simple error handling, but sometimes you need to return more than None. Happily, you can switch to Either without changing a great deal. But you can't mix them easily, and that is a suckful thing about monads indeed.

[cageface]

So what do I do if I want to write a function that takes another function as a parameter, and some of the possible functions use Maybe and some use Either? What would this code look like?

[yummyfajitas]

f: (a -> m b) -> ... -> m Result

Maybe and Either are both monads and by convention Left errCode is the fail method of the Either monad. This will work exactly as you think it should. It will also work with, e.g., io actions that might fail.

[naradaellis]

If I understand you correctly, such a possibility can never arise in Haskell's type system. A possible function would be (a -> Maybe b) -> a -> b, and this won't accept anything that returns an Either.