[GHC] #15416: Higher rank types in pattern synonyms
GHC
ghc-devs at haskell.org
Fri Jul 27 09:31:12 UTC 2018
#15416: Higher rank types in pattern synonyms
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Reporter: mniip | Owner: (none)
Type: bug | Status: new
Priority: normal | Milestone: 8.6.1
Component: Compiler (Type | Version: 8.4.3
checker) | Keywords:
Resolution: | PatternSynonyms
Operating System: Unknown/Multiple | Architecture:
Type of failure: GHC rejects | Unknown/Multiple
valid program | Test Case:
Blocked By: | Blocking:
Related Tickets: | Differential Rev(s):
Wiki Page: |
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Comment (by mniip):
Replying to [comment:1 simonpj]:
>
> You are treading on thin ice. Consider this
> {{{
> f1 :: (forall a. a->a) -> Int
> f1 (x :: forall b. b->b) = x 3
>
> f2 :: (forall a. a->a) -> Int
> f2 x = case x of
> (y :: forall b. b->b) -> y 3
> }}}
> You might expect `f1` and `f2` to behave the same, because `f2` only
replaces
> inline pattern matching with a case-expression.
>
> But `f1` as accepted and `f2` is rejected thus
> {{{
> * Couldn't match expected type `a0 -> a0'
> with actual type `forall b. b -> b'
> * When checking that the pattern signature: forall b. b -> b
> fits the type of its context: a0 -> a0
> In the pattern: y :: forall b. b -> b
> In a case alternative: (y :: forall b. b -> b) -> y 3
> |
> 10 | (y :: forall b. b->b) -> y 3
> }}}
> Very similar to the failure you see. Why?
>
> * In `f1` the higher-rank type inference machinery "pushes down" the
type of the argument, from `f1`'s type signature, into the pattern `(x ::
forall b. b->b)`.
>
> * But in `f2`, the variable `x` indeed gets type `forall b. b->b` (via
this same push-down mechanism, but then ''that type gets instantiated at
the call site of `x`''. So the scrutinee of the `case` has type `alpha
-> alpha`, for some as-yet-unknown type `alpha`.
> And that, of course, is not polymorphic enough.
Wouldn't `alpha` be a unification variable in this case and therefore be
polymorphic just enough?
> * The type inference engine never generalises the scrutinee of a `case`.
(I suppose one could revisit that, though I do not know how.)
Consider if desugaring came before typechecking. This wouldn't be a
problem because this isn't a case-of in the Core sense. Can't say I have a
solution but maybe it's worth taking a look at typechecking a ''haskell''
case-of based on what ''Core'' constructs it desugars into?
> I hope that explains why your fourth example breaks.
>
> When we first did pattern synonyms I expected the types to always be of
form
> {{{
> K :: t1 -> ... -> tn -> T s1 .. sm
> }}}
>
> where `T` is a data type. We loosened that up a bit to allow
> arbitrary return types. (I forget what the motivation was; I wonder if
anyone else remembers? There
> may be a ticket.)
That does indeed explain the extreme awkwardness of the current syntax.
The part where `P => Q => A -> B -> C` bizzarely stands for `P => ((Q *>
(A, B)) <-> C)`.
> What you are doing is putting a `forall` in that return position. I
never considered that!
> It would be interesting to see a compelling motivation for doing this.
Eg why don't you say this?
> {{{
> pattern N :: forall a r. () => () => r -> (a -> r) -> r
> pattern J :: forall a r. a -> r -> (a -> r) -> r
> }}}
Because then reversing the equations gets you `forall a r` I can match on
a scrutinee of type `r -> (a -> r) -> r` and bind a variable of type `a`.
This is clearly not what we want here (`r` is rigid, but we demand `r ~
Maybe`), and the definition of `J` doens't typecheck under that signature.
--
Ticket URL: <http://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/15416#comment:2>
GHC <http://www.haskell.org/ghc/>
The Glasgow Haskell Compiler
More information about the ghc-tickets
mailing list