[Haskell-cafe] More liberal than liberal type synonyms

[Dmitry Kulagin]

> For short, type synonyms work for mere aliases, but not for full-fledged> type-level non-inductive functions.> And sometimes we intuitively want to use them as such.
Thank you, Yves! It is now more clear for me.

Still, it seems that ability to use partially applied type synonyms would be
very natural (and useful) extension to the language. It would allow to avoid
boilerplate code associated with creating "really new" types instead of just
using synonims for existing ones.

On Wed, Dec 7, 2011 at 3:51 PM, Yves Parès <limestrael at gmail.com> wrote:
> Ah, maybe Dan could tell us if it works only with GHC 7.
>
> Dmitry, I had your problem many times. The last time was when I saw you
> could define the ContT monad in terms of Cont (the opposite is done in the
> mtl).
> It leads to a simpler code, but you are stucked when trying to define ContT
> as an instance of MonadTrans:
>
> data Cont r a = ...
> -- [instances of Monad Cont, blah blah blah]
>
> type ContT r m a = Cont r (m a)
>
> instance MonadTrans (ContT r) where  -- This doesn't compile, even if it is
> logical
>   lift = ...
>
> For short, type synonyms work for mere aliases, but not for full-fledged
> type-level non-inductive functions.
> And sometimes we intuitively want to use them as such.
>
>
> 2011/12/7 Dmitry Kulagin <dmitry.kulagin at gmail.com>
>>
>> > Dmitry, does your code work with LiberalTypeSynonyms extention
>> > activated?
>> No, the same error:
>> Type synonym `StateA' should have 1 argument, but has been given 0
>>
>> But I have GHC 6.12.3
>>
>> Dmitry
>> 2011/12/7 Yves Parès <limestrael at gmail.com>:
>> > This is impossible:
>> > in the definition of 'StateT s m a', m must be a monad and then have the
>> > *
>> > -> * kind.
>> > So you cannot pass (StateA a), because it has simply the * kind.
>> >
>> > Dmitry, does your code work with LiberalTypeSynonyms extention
>> > activated?
>> >
>> >
>> > 2011/12/7 Øystein Kolsrud <kolsrud at gmail.com>
>> >>
>> >> You should be able to write something like this:
>> >>
>> >> type StateB a b = StateT SomeOtherState (StateA a) b
>> >>
>> >> Best regards, Øystein Kolsrud
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On Wed, Dec 7, 2011 at 11:48 AM, Dmitry Kulagin
>> >> <dmitry.kulagin at gmail.com>
>> >> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> Hi Dan,
>> >>>
>> >>> I am still pretty new in Haskell, but this problem annoys me already.
>> >>>
>> >>> If I define certain monad as a type synonym:
>> >>>
>> >>>    type StateA a = StateT SomeState SomeMonad a
>> >>>
>> >>> Then I can't declare new monad based on the synonym:
>> >>>
>> >>>    type StateB a = StateT SomeOtherState StateA a
>> >>>
>> >>> The only way I know to overcome is to declare StateA without `a':
>> >>>
>> >>>    type StateA = StateT SomeState SomeMonad
>> >>>
>> >>> But it is not always possible with existing code base.
>> >>>
>> >>> I am sorry, if this is offtopic, but it seemed to me that the problem
>> >>> is realted to partially applied type synomyms you described.
>> >>>
>> >>> Thanks!
>> >>> Dmitry
>> >>>
>> >>> On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 10:59 PM, Dan Doel <dan.doel at gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>> > Greetings,
>> >>> >
>> >>> > In the process of working on a Haskell-alike language recently, Ed
>> >>> > Kmett and I realized that we had (without really thinking about it)
>> >>> > implemented type synonyms that are a bit more liberal than GHC's.
>> >>> > With
>> >>> > LiberalTypeSynonyms enabled, GHC allows:
>> >>> >
>> >>> >    type Foo a b = b -> a
>> >>> >    type Bar f = f String Int
>> >>> >
>> >>> >    baz :: Bar Foo
>> >>> >    baz = show
>> >>> >
>> >>> > because Bar expands to saturate Foo. However, we had also
>> >>> > implemented
>> >>> > the following, which fails in GHC:
>> >>> >
>> >>> >    type Foo a b = b -> a
>> >>> >    type Bar f = f (Foo Int) (Foo Int)
>> >>> >    type Baz f g = f Int -> g Int
>> >>> >
>> >>> >    quux :: Bar Baz
>> >>> >    quux = id
>> >>> >
>> >>> > That is: type synonyms are allowed to be partially applied within
>> >>> > other type synonyms, as long as similar transitive saturation
>> >>> > guarantees are met during their use.
>> >>> >
>> >>> > I don't know how useful it is, but I was curious if anyone can see
>> >>> > anything wrong with allowing this (it seems okay to me after a
>> >>> > little
>> >>> > thought), and thought I'd float the idea out to the GHC developers,
>> >>> > in
>> >>> > case they're interested in picking it up.
>> >>> >
>> >>> > -- Dan
>> >>> >
>> >>> > _______________________________________________
>> >>> > Haskell-Cafe mailing list
>> >>> > Haskell-Cafe at haskell.org
>> >>> > http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
>> >>>
>> >>> _______________________________________________
>> >>> Haskell-Cafe mailing list
>> >>> Haskell-Cafe at haskell.org
>> >>> http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> Mvh Øystein Kolsrud
>> >>
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> Haskell-Cafe mailing list
>> >> Haskell-Cafe at haskell.org
>> >> http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
>> >>
>> >
>
>