On May 16, 2005, at 12:46 AM, Neil Mitchell wrote:

Hi,

Yes, sounds like a good idea. I'm not sure the right approach is to
make the user give this information though - the code will very likely
be something like

doSomethingToAModule (SModule a b) = f a b

from which you can derive the type SCode(SModule) very easily. As the
expressions get more complex, you will want more substantial
annotations - i.e. SCode(SModule(_,[])|SUnknown) for something which
either exports nothing, or is unknown. At this point getting the
programmer to type in essentially the same information twice is likely
to become annoying.
I'm not certain I agree with you. Where I do agree is that the types are liable to get very complex fairly quickly, and this may well be the flaw in the plan, however, I think Haskell benefits greatly from asking the programmer to provide the same information twice in slightly different forms.

The type system after all is essentially a method of providing a sanity check -- "does the code actually match up with what the programmer specified as a type".

My current work on my PhD is all related to checking that a Haskell
program cannot raise a pattern match error, and it is accomplished in
a similar sort of method to what you are suggesting, and achieves
similar goals. This work is still ongoing, but a first order checker
exists for a subset of Haskell already - so progress is being made.
I haven't thought about this for more than half a day when the idea popped into my head, so obviously you've dealt with it a bit more, but I wonder if this is only half the problem. By the sounds of it you are doing type inferencing from the program (as you explained above), which allows for a certain level of checks. However, type errors are not only thrown when the type inference system can't generate types to fit the program, but also when the programmer has specified types that are different to that the inference worked out.

Thanks for a very interesting reply

Tom Davie

_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe

Reply via email to