Avoiding construction of dead dictionaries

[Brandon Allbery]

We haven't figured out what they did, but the other day we had someone in
#haskell with an infinite loop evaluating a dictionary. So apparently it is
possible for a dictionary to be bottom somehow.

On Mon, Aug 9, 2021 at 11:27 AM Tom Smeding <x at tomsmeding.com> wrote:

> Hi Mike,
>
>
> > But wouldn't that imply that ghc can build dictionary-construction code
>
> > that evaluates to bottom? Can that happen?
>
>
> I assume no, but here the dictionary is embedded as a field in the GADT,
> right? So if the data value is bottom, there is not even a dictionary to be
> found, let alone not-bottom.
>
>
> This assumes that the Dict in `Entail (Sub Dict)` is a GADT like
>
>
> Dict :: Con b => Dict something
>
>
> where the Con dictionary is contained in the GADT. Remember that in Core,
> dictionaries are values, and there is no difference between => and ->.
>
>
> - Tom
>
>
>
> -------- Original Message --------
>
> On 9 Aug 2021, 15:24, Michael Sperber < sperber at deinprogramm.de> wrote:
>
>
> Thanks for thinking about this one!
>
> On Fri, Aug 06 2021, Tom Smeding <x at tomsmeding.com> wrote:
>
> > Would it not be unsound for ghc to elide dictionary construction here?
>
> > After all, the right-hand side might actually be a bottom
>
> > (e.g. undefined) at run-time, in which case the pattern match cannot
>
> > succeed according to the semantics of Haskell.
>
> But wouldn't that imply that ghc can build dictionary-construction code
>
> that evaluates to bottom? Can that happen?
>
> > I suspect that if you make the pattern match lazy (i.e. ~(Entail (Sub
>
> > Dict))) or ignore the argument altogether (i.e. _), dictionary
>
> > construction will be elided.
>
> Thanks for the hint! ghc gives me this unfortunately, implying that it
>
> agreed with your first comment:
>
> src/ConCat/Category.hs:190:29: error:
>
> • Could not deduce: Con b arising from a use of ‘r’
>
> from the context: Con a
>
> bound by the type signature for:
>
> (<+) :: forall a b r. Con a => (Con b => r) -> (a |- b) -> r
>
> at src/ConCat/Category.hs:189:1-46
>
> • In the expression: r
>
> In an equation for ‘<+’: r <+ ~(Entail (Sub Dict)) = r
>
> • Relevant bindings include
>
> r :: Con b => r (bound at src/ConCat/Category.hs:190:1)
>
> (<+) :: (Con b => r) -> (a |- b) -> r
>
> (bound at src/ConCat/Category.hs:190:3)
>
> |
>
> 190 | r <+ ~(Entail (Sub Dict)) = r
>
> | ^
>
> Other ideas welcome!
>
> --
>
> Regards,
>
> Mike
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list
>
> Glasgow-haskell-users at haskell.org
>
> http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
>
> _______________________________________________
> Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list
> Glasgow-haskell-users at haskell.org
> http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
>


-- 
brandon s allbery kf8nh
allbery.b at gmail.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.haskell.org/pipermail/glasgow-haskell-users/attachments/20210809/f801ec96/attachment.html>