1. 19 Feb, 2007 1 commit
  2. 02 Feb, 2007 1 commit
  3. 31 Jan, 2007 1 commit
  4. 21 Dec, 2006 1 commit
    • lennart@augustsson.net's avatar
      Add support for overloaded string literals. · 90dc9026
      lennart@augustsson.net authored
      The class is named IsString with the single method fromString.
      Overloaded strings work the same way as overloaded numeric literals.
      In expressions a string literals gets a fromString applied to it.
      In a pattern there will be an equality comparison with the fromString:ed literal.
      
      Use -foverloaded-strings to enable this extension.
       
      90dc9026
  5. 09 Jan, 2007 1 commit
  6. 03 Jan, 2007 1 commit
  7. 02 Jan, 2007 1 commit
    • simonpj@microsoft.com's avatar
      Big tidy-up of deriving code · 84923cc7
      simonpj@microsoft.com authored
      This tidy-up, triggered by Trac #1068, re-factors the way that 'deriving' 
      happens.  It took me way longer than I had intended.  The main changes,
      by far are to TcDeriv; everyting else is a minor consequence.
      
      While I was at it, I changed the syntax for standalone deriving, so that
      it goes
      	derive instance Show (T a)
      
      (instead of "derive Show for T").  However, there's still an implicit
      context, generated by the deriving code, and I wonder if it shouldn't really
      be
      	derive instance (..) => Show (T a)
      but I have left it simple for now.
      
      I also added a function Type.substTyVars, and used it here and there, which
      led to some one-line changes otherwise unrelated (sorry).
      
      Loose ends:
        * 'deriving Typeable' for indexed data types is still not right
        * standalone deriving should be documented
      84923cc7
  8. 12 Dec, 2006 1 commit
  9. 11 Dec, 2006 2 commits
  10. 01 Dec, 2006 1 commit
  11. 24 Nov, 2006 2 commits
    • simonpj@microsoft.com's avatar
      Improve handling of implicit parameters · 2e9952b7
      simonpj@microsoft.com authored
      A message to Haskell Cafe from Grzegorz Chrupala made me realise that
      GHC was not handling implicit parameters correctly, when it comes to
      choosing the variables to quantify, and ambiguity tests.  Here's the 
      note I added to TcSimplify:
      
      Note [Implicit parameters and ambiguity] 
      ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
      What type should we infer for this?
      	f x = (show ?y, x::Int)
      Since we must quantify over the ?y, the most plausible type is
      	f :: (Show a, ?y::a) => Int -> (String, Int)
      But notice that the type of the RHS is (String,Int), with no type 
      varibables mentioned at all!  The type of f looks ambiguous.  But
      it isn't, because at a call site we might have
      	let ?y = 5::Int in f 7
      and all is well.  In effect, implicit parameters are, well, parameters,
      so we can take their type variables into account as part of the
      "tau-tvs" stuff.  This is done in the function 'FunDeps.grow'.
      
      
      The actual changes are in FunDeps.grow, and the tests are
      	tc219, tc219
      2e9952b7
    • simonpj@microsoft.com's avatar
      Gather constraints in program order · ecd655aa
      simonpj@microsoft.com authored
      Provoked by a suggestion of Simon's, this patch makes a half-hearted attempt
      to gather constraints in program order, so that we tend to report an error
      at its first occurrence, rather than its last.  Examples:
      	mdofail001, tcfail015
      
      It's "half-hearted" because generally-speaking the typechecker does not
      guaranteed to keep constraints in order; it treats them as a set.  Nevertheless
      this very small change seems to improve matters, so it seems a good one.
      ecd655aa
  12. 23 Nov, 2006 1 commit
    • simonpj@microsoft.com's avatar
      Simplify TcSimplify, by removing Free · a3a15a64
      simonpj@microsoft.com authored
      For a long time TcSimplify used a three-way classification of constraints, 
      into 	Free
      	Irred
      	ReduceMe
      (see the data type WhatToDo).  In the new world of implication constraints,
      the Free case does not make so much sense, and I managed to elminate it
      altogether, thus simplifying the story somewhat.  Now WhatToDo has constructors
      	Stop
      	ReduceMe
      
      There should be no change in behaviour.
      a3a15a64
  13. 22 Nov, 2006 1 commit
    • simonpj@microsoft.com's avatar
      Retain simplifications of implication constraints · 5adfdfb2
      simonpj@microsoft.com authored
      When simplifying an implication constraint (reduceImplication), if we make
      progress, make a new implication constraint for the result.  If we don't
      do this, we get a constraint that can be simplified in a unique way,
      and that in turn confuses reportNoInstance
      5adfdfb2
  14. 10 Nov, 2006 1 commit
  15. 01 Nov, 2006 2 commits
  16. 11 Oct, 2006 1 commit
  17. 20 Sep, 2006 1 commit
  18. 19 Sep, 2006 1 commit
  19. 29 Sep, 2006 2 commits
  20. 23 Sep, 2006 1 commit
  21. 20 Sep, 2006 3 commits
    • chak@cse.unsw.edu.au.'s avatar
      Complete the evidence generation for GADTs · 15cb792d
      chak@cse.unsw.edu.au. authored
      Mon Sep 18 14:43:22 EDT 2006  Manuel M T Chakravarty <chak@cse.unsw.edu.au>
        * Complete the evidence generation for GADTs
        Sat Aug  5 21:39:51 EDT 2006  Manuel M T Chakravarty <chak@cse.unsw.edu.au>
          * Complete the evidence generation for GADTs
          Thu Jul 13 17:18:07 EDT 2006  simonpj@microsoft.com
            
            This patch completes FC evidence generation for GADTs.
            
            It doesn't work properly yet, because part of the compiler thinks
            	(t1 :=: t2) => t3
            is represented with FunTy/PredTy, while the rest thinks it's represented
            using ForAllTy.  Once that's done things should start to work.
      15cb792d
    • chak@cse.unsw.edu.au.'s avatar
      some bug-fixes, newtype deriving might work now · 44ba24dc
      chak@cse.unsw.edu.au. authored
      Mon Sep 18 14:33:01 EDT 2006  Manuel M T Chakravarty <chak@cse.unsw.edu.au>
        * some bug-fixes, newtype deriving might work now
        Sat Aug  5 21:29:28 EDT 2006  Manuel M T Chakravarty <chak@cse.unsw.edu.au>
          * some bug-fixes, newtype deriving might work now
          Tue Jul 11 12:16:13 EDT 2006  kevind@bu.edu
      44ba24dc
    • chak@cse.unsw.edu.au.'s avatar
      Massive patch for the first months work adding System FC to GHC #34 · 3e83dfb2
      chak@cse.unsw.edu.au. authored
      Fri Sep 15 18:56:58 EDT 2006  Manuel M T Chakravarty <chak@cse.unsw.edu.au>
        * Massive patch for the first months work adding System FC to GHC #34
        Fri Aug  4 18:20:57 EDT 2006  Manuel M T Chakravarty <chak@cse.unsw.edu.au>
          * Massive patch for the first months work adding System FC to GHC #34
          
          Broken up massive patch -=chak
          Original log message:  
          This is (sadly) all done in one patch to avoid Darcs bugs.
          It's not complete work... more FC stuff to come.  A compiler
          using just this patch will fail dismally.
      3e83dfb2
  22. 26 Jul, 2006 1 commit
  23. 18 Sep, 2006 1 commit
  24. 11 Aug, 2006 1 commit
  25. 07 Aug, 2006 1 commit
    • simonpj@microsoft.com's avatar
      Add -fextended-default-rules and -fmono-pat-binds · 6e0c3f50
      simonpj@microsoft.com authored
      Add -fextended-deafult-rules (in response to Don Stewart's message below),
      and document them.
      
      Also doucument -fmono-pat-binds/-fno-mono-pat-binds, which has been in 
      GHC a few weeks now. 
      
      (The two are in one patch because the diffs were so close together
      that Darcs combined them.)
      
      Simon
      
      
      From: Donald Bruce Stewart [mailto:dons@cse.unsw.edu.au] 
      Sent: 07 August 2006 10:52
      
      While we're thinking about defaulting, I have a question..
      
      ghci uses an extended defaulting system, to allow things like:
              Prelude> reverse []
              []
      to work, and to have the right instance of Show found. The manual says:
      
          "..it is tiresome for the user to have to specify the type, so GHCi extends
          Haskell's type-defaulting rules (Section 4.3.4 of the Haskell 98 Report
          (Revised)) as follows. If the expression yields a set of type constraints
          that are all from standard classes (Num, Eq etc.), and at least one is
          either a numeric class or the Show, Eq, or Ord class, GHCi will try to use
          one of the default types, just as described in the Report. The standard
          defaulting rules require that one of the classes is numeric; the difference
          here is that defaulting is also triggered at least one is Show, Eq, or Ord."
      
      Currently, there is no way to get at this "extended" defaulting for compiled
      modules. However, I have a use case for in fact doing this.
      
      With runtime evaluated Haskell, embedding 'interpreters' (over hs-plugins) is
      easy. lambdabot, for example, implements a sandboxed haskell eval system. But
      it doesn't have access to the defaulting mechanism of ghci, so we have:
      
          dons:: > reverse []
          lambdabot:: Add a type signature
          dons:: > reverse [] :: [()]
          lambdabot:: []
      
      Which is annoying -- newbies wonder why they have to add these extra
      constraints to get a Show instance.
      
      I'm wondering, since the extended defaulting mechanisms are already
      implemented, could they be made available to compiled modules as well,
      perhaps using a flag, -fextended-defaulting? 
      6e0c3f50
  26. 27 Jul, 2006 1 commit
  27. 26 Jun, 2006 1 commit
    • simonpj@microsoft.com's avatar
      Improve consistency checking for derived instances · 7f0ce617
      simonpj@microsoft.com authored
      This patch arranges that derived instances use the same instance-decl
      checking code as user-defined instances.  That gives greater consistency
      in error messages.
      
      Furthermore, the error description if this consistency check fails is now
      much more explicit.  For example, drvfail003 now says
           Variable occurs more often in a constraint than in the instance head
             in the constraint: Show (v (v a))
           (Use -fallow-undecidable-instances to permit this)
           In the derived instance
             instance (Show (v (v a))) => Show (Square_ v w a)
      7f0ce617
  28. 19 May, 2006 1 commit
    • simonpj@microsoft.com's avatar
      Improved RULE lhs typechecking; less dictionary sharing · 5a8a219c
      simonpj@microsoft.com authored
      See long comment with Simplify.tcSimplifyRuleLhs.
      
      Here's the key example:
      
        RULE "g"  forall x y z. g (x == y) (y == z) = ...
      
      Here, the two dictionaries are *identical*, but we do NOT WANT to
      generate the rule
      
      RULE	forall x::a, y::a, z::a, d1::Eq a
      	  f ((==) d1 x y) ((>) d1 y z) = ...
      
      Instead we want
      
      RULE	forall x::a, y::a, z::a, d1::Eq a, d2:Eq a
      	  f ((==) d1 x y) ((>) d2 y z) = ...
      5a8a219c
  29. 07 Apr, 2006 1 commit
    • Simon Marlow's avatar
      Reorganisation of the source tree · 0065d5ab
      Simon Marlow authored
      Most of the other users of the fptools build system have migrated to
      Cabal, and with the move to darcs we can now flatten the source tree
      without losing history, so here goes.
      
      The main change is that the ghc/ subdir is gone, and most of what it
      contained is now at the top level.  The build system now makes no
      pretense at being multi-project, it is just the GHC build system.
      
      No doubt this will break many things, and there will be a period of
      instability while we fix the dependencies.  A straightforward build
      should work, but I haven't yet fixed binary/source distributions.
      Changes to the Building Guide will follow, too.
      0065d5ab
  30. 23 Feb, 2006 1 commit
  31. 13 Feb, 2006 1 commit
  32. 25 Jan, 2006 1 commit
    • simonpj@microsoft.com's avatar
      Simon's big boxy-type commit · ac10f840
      simonpj@microsoft.com authored
      This very large commit adds impredicativity to GHC, plus
      numerous other small things.
        
      *** WARNING: I have compiled all the libraries, and
      ***	     a stage-2 compiler, and everything seems
      ***	     fine.  But don't grab this patch if you 
      ***	     can't tolerate a hiccup if something is
      ***	     broken.
        
      The big picture is this:
      
      a) GHC handles impredicative polymorphism, as described in the
         "Boxy types: type inference for higher-rank types and
         impredicativity" paper
      
      b) GHC handles GADTs in the new simplified (and very sligtly less
         epxrssive) way described in the
         "Simple unification-based type inference for GADTs" paper
      
        
      But there are lots of smaller changes, and since it was pre-Darcs
      they are not individually recorded.
        
      Some things to watch out for:
        
      c)   The story on lexically-scoped type variables has changed, as per
           my email.  I append the story below for completeness, but I 
           am still not happy with it, and it may change again.  In particular,
           the new story does not allow a pattern-bound scoped type variable
           to be wobbly, so (\(x::[a]) -> ...) is usually rejected.  This is
           more restrictive than before, and we might loosen up again.
        
      d)   A consequence of adding impredicativity is that GHC is a bit less
           gung ho about converting automatically between
        	(ty1 -> forall a. ty2)    and    (forall a. ty1 -> ty2)
           In particular, you may need to eta-expand some functions to make
           typechecking work again.
         
           Furthermore, functions are now invariant in their argument types,
           rather than being contravariant.  Again, the main consequence is
           that you may occasionally need to eta-expand function arguments when
           using higher-rank polymorphism.
        
      
      Please test, and let me know of any hiccups
      
      
      Scoped type variables in GHC
      ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
      	January 2006
      
      0) Terminology.
         
         A *pattern binding* is of the form
      	pat = rhs
      
         A *function binding* is of the form
      	f pat1 .. patn = rhs
      
         A binding of the formm
      	var = rhs
         is treated as a (degenerate) *function binding*.
      
      
         A *declaration type signature* is a separate type signature for a
         let-bound or where-bound variable:
      	f :: Int -> Int
      
         A *pattern type signature* is a signature in a pattern: 
      	\(x::a) -> x
      	f (x::a) = x
      
         A *result type signature* is a signature on the result of a
         function definition:
      	f :: forall a. [a] -> a
      	head (x:xs) :: a = x
      
         The form
      	x :: a = rhs
         is treated as a (degnerate) function binding with a result
         type signature, not as a pattern binding.
      
      1) The main invariants:
      
           A) A lexically-scoped type variable always names a (rigid)
       	type variable (not an arbitrary type).  THIS IS A CHANGE.
              Previously, a scoped type variable named an arbitrary *type*.
      
           B) A type signature always describes a rigid type (since
      	its free (scoped) type variables name rigid type variables).
      	This is also a change, a consequence of (A).
      
           C) Distinct lexically-scoped type variables name distinct
      	rigid type variables.  This choice is open; 
      
      2) Scoping
      
      2(a) If a declaration type signature has an explicit forall, those type
         variables are brought into scope in the right hand side of the 
         corresponding binding (plus, for function bindings, the patterns on
         the LHS).  
      	f :: forall a. a -> [a]
      	f (x::a) = [x :: a, x]
         Both occurences of 'a' in the second line are bound by 
         the 'forall a' in the first line
      
         A declaration type signature *without* an explicit top-level forall
         is implicitly quantified over all the type variables that are
         mentioned in the type but not already in scope.  GHC's current
         rule is that this implicit quantification does *not* bring into scope
         any new scoped type variables.
      	f :: a -> a
      	f x = ...('a' is not in scope here)...
         This gives compatibility with Haskell 98
      
      2(b) A pattern type signature implicitly brings into scope any type
         variables mentioned in the type that are not already into scope.
         These are called *pattern-bound type variables*.
      	g :: a -> a -> [a]
      	g (x::a) (y::a) = [y :: a, x]
         The pattern type signature (x::a) brings 'a' into scope.
         The 'a' in the pattern (y::a) is bound, as is the occurrence on 
         the RHS.  
      
         A pattern type siganture is the only way you can bring existentials 
         into scope.
      	data T where
      	  MkT :: forall a. a -> (a->Int) -> T
      
      	f x = case x of
      		MkT (x::a) f -> f (x::a)
      
      2a) QUESTION
      	class C a where
      	  op :: forall b. b->a->a
      
      	instance C (T p q) where
      	  op = <rhs>
          Clearly p,q are in scope in <rhs>, but is 'b'?  Not at the moment.
          Nor can you add a type signature for op in the instance decl.
          You'd have to say this:
      	instance C (T p q) where
      	  op = let op' :: forall b. ...
      	           op' = <rhs>
      	       in op'
      
      3) A pattern-bound type variable is allowed only if the pattern's
         expected type is rigid.  Otherwise we don't know exactly *which*
         skolem the scoped type variable should be bound to, and that means
         we can't do GADT refinement.  This is invariant (A), and it is a 
         big change from the current situation.
      
      	f (x::a) = x	-- NO; pattern type is wobbly
      	
      	g1 :: b -> b
      	g1 (x::b) = x	-- YES, because the pattern type is rigid
      
      	g2 :: b -> b
      	g2 (x::c) = x	-- YES, same reason
      
      	h :: forall b. b -> b
      	h (x::b) = x	-- YES, but the inner b is bound
      
      	k :: forall b. b -> b
      	k (x::c) = x	-- NO, it can't be both b and c
      
      3a) You cannot give different names for the same type variable in the same scope
          (Invariant (C)):
      
      	f1 :: p -> p -> p		-- NO; because 'a' and 'b' would be
      	f1 (x::a) (y::b) = (x::a)	--     bound to the same type variable
      
      	f2 :: p -> p -> p		-- OK; 'a' is bound to the type variable
      	f2 (x::a) (y::a) = (x::a)	--     over which f2 is quantified
      					-- NB: 'p' is not lexically scoped
      
      	f3 :: forall p. p -> p -> p	-- NO: 'p' is now scoped, and is bound to
      	f3 (x::a) (y::a) = (x::a)	--     to the same type varialble as 'a'
      
      	f4 :: forall p. p -> p -> p	-- OK: 'p' is now scoped, and its occurences
      	f4 (x::p) (y::p) = (x::p)	--     in the patterns are bound by the forall
      
      
      3b) You can give a different name to the same type variable in different
          disjoint scopes, just as you can (if you want) give diferent names to 
          the same value parameter
      
      	g :: a -> Bool -> Maybe a
      	g (x::p) True  = Just x  :: Maybe p
      	g (y::q) False = Nothing :: Maybe q
      
      3c) Scoped type variables respect alpha renaming. For example, 
          function f2 from (3a) above could also be written:
      	f2' :: p -> p -> p
      	f2' (x::b) (y::b) = x::b
         where the scoped type variable is called 'b' instead of 'a'.
      
      
      4) Result type signatures obey the same rules as pattern types signatures.
         In particular, they can bind a type variable only if the result type is rigid
      
      	f x :: a = x	-- NO
      
      	g :: b -> b
      	g x :: b = x	-- YES; binds b in rhs
      
      5) A *pattern type signature* in a *pattern binding* cannot bind a 
         scoped type variable
      
      	(x::a, y) = ...		-- Legal only if 'a' is already in scope
      
         Reason: in type checking, the "expected type" of the LHS pattern is
         always wobbly, so we can't bind a rigid type variable.  (The exception
         would be for an existential type variable, but existentials are not
         allowed in pattern bindings either.)
       
         Even this is illegal
      	f :: forall a. a -> a
      	f x = let ((y::b)::a, z) = ... 
      	      in 
         Here it looks as if 'b' might get a rigid binding; but you can't bind
         it to the same skolem as a.
      
      6) Explicitly-forall'd type variables in the *declaration type signature(s)*
         for a *pattern binding* do not scope AT ALL.
      
      	x :: forall a. a->a	  -- NO; the forall a does 
      	Just (x::a->a) = Just id  --     not scope at all
      
      	y :: forall a. a->a
      	Just y = Just (id :: a->a)  -- NO; same reason
      
         THIS IS A CHANGE, but one I bet that very few people will notice.
         Here's why:
      
      	strange :: forall b. (b->b,b->b)
      	strange = (id,id)
      
      	x1 :: forall a. a->a
      	y1 :: forall b. b->b
      	(x1,y1) = strange
      
          This is legal Haskell 98 (modulo the forall). If both 'a' and 'b'
          both scoped over the RHS, they'd get unified and so cannot stand
          for distinct type variables. One could *imagine* allowing this:
         
      	x2 :: forall a. a->a
      	y2 :: forall a. a->a
      	(x2,y2) = strange
      
          using the very same type variable 'a' in both signatures, so that
          a single 'a' scopes over the RHS.  That seems defensible, but odd,
          because though there are two type signatures, they introduce just
          *one* scoped type variable, a.
      
      7) Possible extension.  We might consider allowing
      	\(x :: [ _ ]) -> <expr>
          where "_" is a wild card, to mean "x has type list of something", without
          naming the something.
      ac10f840
  33. 18 Jan, 2006 1 commit
  34. 16 Nov, 2005 1 commit
    • simonpj's avatar
      [project @ 2005-11-16 12:55:58 by simonpj] · cdea9949
      simonpj authored
      Two significant changes to the representation of types
      
      1. Change the representation of type synonyms
      
          Up to now, type synonym applications have been held in
          *both* expanded *and* un-expanded form.  Unfortunately, this
          has exponential (!) behaviour when type synonyms are deeply
          nested.  E.g.
      	    type P a b = (a,b)
      	    f :: P a (P b (P c (P d e)))
          
          This showed up in a program of Joel Reymont, now immortalised
          as typecheck/should_compile/syn-perf.hs
      
          So now synonyms are held as ordinary TyConApps, and expanded
          only on demand.  
      
          SynNote has disappeared altogether, so the only remaining TyNote
          is a FTVNote.  I'm not sure if it's even useful.
      
      2. Eta-reduce newtypes
      
          See the Note [Newtype eta] in TyCon.lhs
          
          If we have 
      	    newtype T a b = MkT (S a b)
          
          then, in Core land, we would like S = T, even though the application
          of T is then not saturated. This commit eta-reduces T's RHS, and
          keeps that inside the TyCon (in nt_etad_rhs).  Result is that 
          coreEqType can be simpler, and has less need of expanding newtypes.
      cdea9949