w what you need in your use-case. A type like ‘a’ might be a very
>> fine answer!
>>
>>
>>
>> A lot depends on precisely what you are trying to do.
>>
>>
>>
>> Simon
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* Peter Podlovics [mailto:peter.d.podlov...@gmail
ov...@gmail.com]
> *Sent:* 05 March 2018 14:54
> *To:* Simon Peyton Jones <simo...@microsoft.com>
> *Subject:* Re: Type checking expressions
>
>
>
> My main concern with that approach is that it might not give the correct
> type. For example the hsPatType function only
il.com]
Sent: 05 March 2018 14:54
To: Simon Peyton Jones <simo...@microsoft.com>
Subject: Re: Type checking expressions
My main concern with that approach is that it might not give the correct type.
For example the hsPatType function only gives unconstrained types, so it is
incorrect for a
otated tree in that case. But they are relatively
rare.
Others must have wanted something like this…
Simon
From: ghc-devs [mailto:ghc-devs-boun...@haskell.org] On Behalf Of Peter
Podlovics
Sent: 02 March 2018 12:05
To: ghc-devs@haskell.org
Subject: Fwd: Type checking expressions
Hello everyo
Hello everyone,
I would like to ask for some advice regarding the type checker part of GHC.
My goal is to determine the type of every expression, pattern etc. in the
syntax tree. Currently the compiler doesn't store this information, so I
have
to type check manually. One important aspect is that
