[Haskell-cafe] datatype contexts

[Ryan Ingram]

There are two types of datatype contexts; haskell'98 contexts (which I
think are terrible), and GHC existential contexts (which I like):

class C a where runC :: a -> Int
data C a => T1 a = D1 a

All this does is add a context to the D1 *constructor*; that is:
-- D1 :: C a => a -> T1 a

But extracting a value of this type does nothing:

foo :: T1 a -> Int
foo (D1 a) = runC a -- compile error

However, putting the context on the RHS as you have done works in GHC
and does "the right thing"; pattern matching on that constructor now
brings the class into scope.  You can think of the datatype has having
another field which is "proof that a is a member of C":

{-# LANGUAGE ExistentialQuantification #-}
data T2 a = C a => D2 a
-- D2 :: C a => a -> T2 a  -- same as D1

bar :: T2 a -> Int
bar (D2 a) = runC a -- works

  -- ryan

On Mon, Jul 26, 2010 at 7:48 AM, Gregory Crosswhite
<gcross at phys.washington.edu> wrote:
>  I agree with prior discussion on this list that adding contexts to datatype
> declarations seems to be more trouble than its worth, since these contexts
> just have to be added again to every function using the datatype.  However,
> I have often wondered:  why do function *have* to have these contexts?  What
> would it affect in the language if we made the contexts be implicit, so that
> if we have
>
>    data Datatype a = Context a => Datatype a
>
> then for function declarations
>
>    f :: D a -> ...
>
> the context "Context a" is automatically asserted by the compiler?
>
> Cheers,
> Greg
>
> _______________________________________________
> Haskell-Cafe mailing list
> Haskell-Cafe at haskell.org
> http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
>