[Haskell-cafe] Where are rank-3 types necessary in practice for maintaining abstraction?

[Timotej Tomandl]

Ok, I thought about it a bit more and realized mask in Control.Exception is
the one where rank-3 is necessary, which is the example I was looking for.
Sorry for the spam.

On Tue, Apr 3, 2018 at 4:36 AM, Timotej Tomandl <timotomandl at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Hello,
>
> So we need rank-2 type in runST :: (forall s. ST
> <https://hackage.haskell.org/package/base-4.11.0.0/docs/Control-Monad-ST.html#t:ST>
> s a) -> a, to prevent s from appearing in a.
>
> I have been thinking about this for a bit, but I failed to come up with a
> practical situation, where rank-3 types are necessary for safety of some
> abstraction.
>
> The rank-3 example in here and any other I found, look very synthetic,
> i.e. limiting computation to id:
> https://ocharles.org.uk/blog/guest-posts/2014-12-18-rank-n-types.html
> and compared to the runST example of limiting a scope of a type variable
> for purposes of safety looks unnatural.
> Could anyone please point me to a practical example of rank-3
> polymorphism, where it is necessary for safety of an abstraction, if it
> exists?
>
> I suspect there is a situation, where rank-3 is necessary for maintaining
> abstration exists, but I can't think of any.
> Any ideas about such situations and even better situations where this is
> used on hackage?
>
> Timotej Tomandl
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.haskell.org/pipermail/haskell-cafe/attachments/20180403/e1c6c53f/attachment.html>