{-
(c) The University of Glasgow 2006
(c) The AQUA Project, Glasgow University, 1993-1998
TcRules: Typechecking transformation rules
-}
{-# LANGUAGE ViewPatterns #-}
{-# LANGUAGE TypeFamilies #-}
module TcRules ( tcRules ) where
import GhcPrelude
import HsSyn
import TcRnTypes
import TcRnMonad
import TcSimplify
import TcMType
import TcType
import TcHsType
import TcExpr
import TcEnv
import TcUnify( buildImplicationFor )
import TcEvidence( mkTcCoVarCo )
import Type
import TyCon( isTypeFamilyTyCon )
import Id
import Var( EvVar )
import VarSet
import BasicTypes ( RuleName )
import SrcLoc
import Outputable
import FastString
import Bag
import Data.List( partition )
{-
Note [Typechecking rules]
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
We *infer* the typ of the LHS, and use that type to *check* the type of
the RHS. That means that higher-rank rules work reasonably well. Here's
an example (test simplCore/should_compile/rule2.hs) produced by Roman:
foo :: (forall m. m a -> m b) -> m a -> m b
foo f = ...
bar :: (forall m. m a -> m a) -> m a -> m a
bar f = ...
{-# RULES "foo/bar" foo = bar #-}
He wanted the rule to typecheck.
-}
tcRules :: [LRuleDecls GhcRn] -> TcM [LRuleDecls GhcTcId]
tcRules decls = mapM (wrapLocM tcRuleDecls) decls
tcRuleDecls :: RuleDecls GhcRn -> TcM (RuleDecls GhcTcId)
tcRuleDecls (HsRules src decls)
= do { tc_decls <- mapM (wrapLocM tcRule) decls
; return (HsRules src tc_decls) }
tcRule :: RuleDecl GhcRn -> TcM (RuleDecl GhcTcId)
tcRule (HsRule name act hs_bndrs lhs fv_lhs rhs fv_rhs)
= addErrCtxt (ruleCtxt $ snd $ unLoc name) $
do { traceTc "---- Rule ------" (pprFullRuleName name)
-- Note [Typechecking rules]
; (vars, bndr_wanted) <- captureConstraints $
tcRuleBndrs hs_bndrs
-- bndr_wanted constraints can include wildcard hole
-- constraints, which we should not forget about.
-- It may mention the skolem type variables bound by
-- the RULE. c.f. Trac #10072
; let (id_bndrs, tv_bndrs) = partition isId vars
; (lhs', lhs_wanted, rhs', rhs_wanted, rule_ty)
<- tcExtendTyVarEnv tv_bndrs $
tcExtendIdEnv id_bndrs $
do { -- See Note [Solve order for RULES]
((lhs', rule_ty), lhs_wanted) <- captureConstraints (tcInferRho lhs)
; (rhs', rhs_wanted) <- captureConstraints $
tcMonoExpr rhs (mkCheckExpType rule_ty)
; return (lhs', lhs_wanted, rhs', rhs_wanted, rule_ty) }
; traceTc "tcRule 1" (vcat [ pprFullRuleName name
, ppr lhs_wanted
, ppr rhs_wanted ])
; let all_lhs_wanted = bndr_wanted `andWC` lhs_wanted
; (lhs_evs, residual_lhs_wanted) <- simplifyRule (snd $ unLoc name)
all_lhs_wanted
rhs_wanted
-- SimplfyRule Plan, step 4
-- Now figure out what to quantify over
-- c.f. TcSimplify.simplifyInfer
-- We quantify over any tyvars free in *either* the rule
-- *or* the bound variables. The latter is important. Consider
-- ss (x,(y,z)) = (x,z)
-- RULE: forall v. fst (ss v) = fst v
-- The type of the rhs of the rule is just a, but v::(a,(b,c))
--
-- We also need to get the completely-uconstrained tyvars of
-- the LHS, lest they otherwise get defaulted to Any; but we do that
-- during zonking (see TcHsSyn.zonkRule)
; let tpl_ids = lhs_evs ++ id_bndrs
; forall_tkvs <- zonkTcTypesAndSplitDepVars $
rule_ty : map idType tpl_ids
; gbls <- tcGetGlobalTyCoVars -- Even though top level, there might be top-level
-- monomorphic bindings from the MR; test tc111
; qtkvs <- quantifyTyVars gbls forall_tkvs
; traceTc "tcRule" (vcat [ pprFullRuleName name
, ppr forall_tkvs
, ppr qtkvs
, ppr rule_ty
, vcat [ ppr id <+> dcolon <+> ppr (idType id) | id <- tpl_ids ]
])
-- SimplfyRule Plan, step 5
-- Simplify the LHS and RHS constraints:
-- For the LHS constraints we must solve the remaining constraints
-- (a) so that we report insoluble ones
-- (b) so that we bind any soluble ones
; let skol_info = RuleSkol (snd (unLoc name))
; (lhs_implic, lhs_binds) <- buildImplicationFor topTcLevel skol_info qtkvs
lhs_evs residual_lhs_wanted
; (rhs_implic, rhs_binds) <- buildImplicationFor topTcLevel skol_info qtkvs
lhs_evs rhs_wanted
; emitImplications (lhs_implic `unionBags` rhs_implic)
; return (HsRule name act
(map (noLoc . RuleBndr . noLoc) (qtkvs ++ tpl_ids))
(mkHsDictLet lhs_binds lhs') fv_lhs
(mkHsDictLet rhs_binds rhs') fv_rhs) }
tcRuleBndrs :: [LRuleBndr GhcRn] -> TcM [Var]
tcRuleBndrs []
= return []
tcRuleBndrs (L _ (RuleBndr (L _ name)) : rule_bndrs)
= do { ty <- newOpenFlexiTyVarTy
; vars <- tcRuleBndrs rule_bndrs
; return (mkLocalId name ty : vars) }
tcRuleBndrs (L _ (RuleBndrSig (L _ name) rn_ty) : rule_bndrs)
-- e.g x :: a->a
-- The tyvar 'a' is brought into scope first, just as if you'd written
-- a::*, x :: a->a
= do { let ctxt = RuleSigCtxt name
; (_ , tvs, id_ty) <- tcHsPatSigType ctxt rn_ty
; let id = mkLocalIdOrCoVar name id_ty
-- See Note [Pattern signature binders] in TcHsType
-- The type variables scope over subsequent bindings; yuk
; vars <- tcExtendTyVarEnv2 tvs $
tcRuleBndrs rule_bndrs
; return (map snd tvs ++ id : vars) }
ruleCtxt :: FastString -> SDoc
ruleCtxt name = text "When checking the transformation rule" <+>
doubleQuotes (ftext name)
{-
*********************************************************************************
* *
Constraint simplification for rules
* *
***********************************************************************************
Note [The SimplifyRule Plan]
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Example. Consider the following left-hand side of a rule
f (x == y) (y > z) = ...
If we typecheck this expression we get constraints
d1 :: Ord a, d2 :: Eq a
We do NOT want to "simplify" to the LHS
forall x::a, y::a, z::a, d1::Ord a.
f ((==) (eqFromOrd d1) x y) ((>) d1 y z) = ...
Instead we want
forall x::a, y::a, z::a, d1::Ord a, d2::Eq a.
f ((==) d2 x y) ((>) d1 y z) = ...
Here is another example:
fromIntegral :: (Integral a, Num b) => a -> b
{-# RULES "foo" fromIntegral = id :: Int -> Int #-}
In the rule, a=b=Int, and Num Int is a superclass of Integral Int. But
we *dont* want to get
forall dIntegralInt.
fromIntegral Int Int dIntegralInt (scsel dIntegralInt) = id Int
because the scsel will mess up RULE matching. Instead we want
forall dIntegralInt, dNumInt.
fromIntegral Int Int dIntegralInt dNumInt = id Int
Even if we have
g (x == y) (y == z) = ..
where the two dictionaries are *identical*, we do NOT WANT
forall x::a, y::a, z::a, d1::Eq a
f ((==) d1 x y) ((>) d1 y z) = ...
because that will only match if the dict args are (visibly) equal.
Instead we want to quantify over the dictionaries separately.
In short, simplifyRuleLhs must *only* squash equalities, leaving
all dicts unchanged, with absolutely no sharing.
Also note that we can't solve the LHS constraints in isolation:
Example foo :: Ord a => a -> a
foo_spec :: Int -> Int
{-# RULE "foo" foo = foo_spec #-}
Here, it's the RHS that fixes the type variable
HOWEVER, under a nested implication things are different
Consider
f :: (forall a. Eq a => a->a) -> Bool -> ...
{-# RULES "foo" forall (v::forall b. Eq b => b->b).
f b True = ...
#-}
Here we *must* solve the wanted (Eq a) from the given (Eq a)
resulting from skolemising the argument type of g. So we
revert to SimplCheck when going under an implication.
--------- So the SimplifyRule Plan is this -----------------------
* Step 0: typecheck the LHS and RHS to get constraints from each
* Step 1: Simplify the LHS and RHS constraints all together in one bag
We do this to discover all unification equalities
* Step 2: Zonk the ORIGINAL (unsimplified) LHS constraints, to take
advantage of those unifications
* Setp 3: Partition the LHS constraints into the ones we will
quantify over, and the others.
See Note [RULE quantification over equalities]
* Step 4: Decide on the type variables to quantify over
* Step 5: Simplify the LHS and RHS constraints separately, using the
quantified constraints as givens
Note [Solve order for RULES]
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
In step 1 above, we need to be a bit careful about solve order.
Consider
f :: Int -> T Int
type instance T Int = Bool
RULE f 3 = True
From the RULE we get
lhs-constraints: T Int ~ alpha
rhs-constraints: Bool ~ alpha
where 'alpha' is the type that connects the two. If we glom them
all together, and solve the RHS constraint first, we might solve
with alpha := Bool. But then we'd end up with a RULE like
RULE: f 3 |> (co :: T Int ~ Bool) = True
which is terrible. We want
RULE: f 3 = True |> (sym co :: Bool ~ T Int)
So we are careful to solve the LHS constraints first, and *then* the
RHS constraints. Actually much of this is done by the on-the-fly
constraint solving, so the same order must be observed in
tcRule.
Note [RULE quantification over equalities]
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Deciding which equalities to quantify over is tricky:
* We do not want to quantify over insoluble equalities (Int ~ Bool)
(a) because we prefer to report a LHS type error
(b) because if such things end up in 'givens' we get a bogus
"inaccessible code" error
* But we do want to quantify over things like (a ~ F b), where
F is a type function.
The difficulty is that it's hard to tell what is insoluble!
So we see whether the simplification step yielded any type errors,
and if so refrain from quantifying over *any* equalities.
Note [Quantifying over coercion holes]
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Equality constraints from the LHS will emit coercion hole Wanteds.
These don't have a name, so we can't quantify over them directly.
Instead, because we really do want to quantify here, invent a new
EvVar for the coercion, fill the hole with the invented EvVar, and
then quantify over the EvVar. Not too tricky -- just some
impedance matching, really.
Note [Simplify cloned constraints]
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
At this stage, we're simplifying constraints only for insolubility
and for unification. Note that all the evidence is quickly discarded.
We use a clone of the real constraint. If we don't do this,
then RHS coercion-hole constraints get filled in, only to get filled
in *again* when solving the implications emitted from tcRule. That's
terrible, so we avoid the problem by cloning the constraints.
-}
simplifyRule :: RuleName
-> WantedConstraints -- Constraints from LHS
-> WantedConstraints -- Constraints from RHS
-> TcM ( [EvVar] -- Quantify over these LHS vars
, WantedConstraints) -- Residual un-quantified LHS constraints
-- See Note [The SimplifyRule Plan]
-- NB: This consumes all simple constraints on the LHS, but not
-- any LHS implication constraints.
simplifyRule name lhs_wanted rhs_wanted
= do {
-- Note [The SimplifyRule Plan] step 1
-- First solve the LHS and *then* solve the RHS
-- Crucially, this performs unifications
-- Why clone? See Note [Simplify cloned constraints]
; lhs_clone <- cloneWC lhs_wanted
; rhs_clone <- cloneWC rhs_wanted
; runTcSDeriveds $
do { _ <- solveWanteds lhs_clone
; _ <- solveWanteds rhs_clone
-- Why do them separately?
-- See Note [Solve order for RULES]
; return () }
-- Note [The SimplifyRule Plan] step 2
; lhs_wanted <- zonkWC lhs_wanted
; let (quant_cts, residual_lhs_wanted) = getRuleQuantCts lhs_wanted
-- Note [The SimplifyRule Plan] step 3
; quant_evs <- mapM mk_quant_ev (bagToList quant_cts)
; traceTc "simplifyRule" $
vcat [ text "LHS of rule" <+> doubleQuotes (ftext name)
, text "lhs_wanted" <+> ppr lhs_wanted
, text "rhs_wanted" <+> ppr rhs_wanted
, text "quant_cts" <+> ppr quant_cts
, text "residual_lhs_wanted" <+> ppr residual_lhs_wanted
]
; return (quant_evs, residual_lhs_wanted) }
where
mk_quant_ev :: Ct -> TcM EvVar
mk_quant_ev ct
| CtWanted { ctev_dest = dest, ctev_pred = pred } <- ctEvidence ct
= case dest of
EvVarDest ev_id -> return ev_id
HoleDest hole -> -- See Note [Quantifying over coercion holes]
do { ev_id <- newEvVar pred
; fillCoercionHole hole (mkTcCoVarCo ev_id)
; return ev_id }
mk_quant_ev ct = pprPanic "mk_quant_ev" (ppr ct)
getRuleQuantCts :: WantedConstraints -> (Cts, WantedConstraints)
-- Extract all the constraints we can quantify over,
-- also returning the depleted WantedConstraints
--
-- NB: we must look inside implications, because with
-- -fdefer-type-errors we generate implications rather eagerly;
-- see TcUnify.implicationNeeded. Not doing so caused Trac #14732.
--
-- Unlike simplifyInfer, we don't leave the WantedConstraints unchanged,
-- and attempt to solve them from the quantified constraints. That
-- nearly works, but fails for a constraint like (d :: Eq Int).
-- We /do/ want to quantify over it, but the short-cut solver
-- (see TcInteract Note [Shortcut solving]) ignores the quantified
-- and instead solves from the top level.
--
-- So we must partition the WantedConstraints ourselves
-- Not hard, but tiresome.
getRuleQuantCts wc
= float_wc emptyVarSet wc
where
float_wc :: TcTyCoVarSet -> WantedConstraints -> (Cts, WantedConstraints)
float_wc skol_tvs (WC { wc_simple = simples, wc_impl = implics })
= ( simple_yes `andCts` implic_yes
, WC { wc_simple = simple_no, wc_impl = implics_no })
where
(simple_yes, simple_no) = partitionBag (rule_quant_ct skol_tvs) simples
(implic_yes, implics_no) = mapAccumBagL (float_implic skol_tvs)
emptyBag implics
float_implic :: TcTyCoVarSet -> Cts -> Implication -> (Cts, Implication)
float_implic skol_tvs yes1 imp
= (yes1 `andCts` yes2, imp { ic_wanted = no })
where
(yes2, no) = float_wc new_skol_tvs (ic_wanted imp)
new_skol_tvs = skol_tvs `extendVarSetList` ic_skols imp
rule_quant_ct :: TcTyCoVarSet -> Ct -> Bool
rule_quant_ct skol_tvs ct
| EqPred _ t1 t2 <- classifyPredType (ctPred ct)
, not (ok_eq t1 t2)
= False -- Note [RULE quantification over equalities]
| isHoleCt ct
= False -- Don't quantify over type holes, obviously
| otherwise
= tyCoVarsOfCt ct `disjointVarSet` skol_tvs
ok_eq t1 t2
| t1 `tcEqType` t2 = False
| otherwise = is_fun_app t1 || is_fun_app t2
is_fun_app ty -- ty is of form (F tys) where F is a type function
= case tyConAppTyCon_maybe ty of
Just tc -> isTypeFamilyTyCon tc
Nothing -> False