Hi Thomas,
Vigorous debate on #9200 (https://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/9200) has led
me to think about polymorphic recursion in the presence of a partial type
signature. For example, take the following silly but well-typed function:
foo :: (a - Bool) - a - ()
foo _ _ = foo not True
Richard,
Since Thomas is attending a summer school for the moment, I'll
try to provide a response and Thomas can correct me later if needed...
2014-06-19 17:57 GMT+02:00 Richard Eisenberg e...@cis.upenn.edu:
Vigorous debate on #9200 (https://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/9200) has
led me to
Great -- this agrees with the current proposal at the type level ((NEWCUSK) in
the language of #9200.)
Thanks for the quick response!
Richard
On Jun 19, 2014, at 6:00 PM, Simon Peyton Jones simo...@microsoft.com wrote:
| So in general, if there is a partial type signature, the compiler
|
Hi,
My apologies for the late reply.
On 2014-04-10 17:43, Richard Eisenberg wrote:
What's the next step from your point of view? Are there unimplemented
bits of this?
We do see some bits left to implement:
* Partial pattern and expression signatures (see [1] for our view on
this issue).
*
Hi,
I'm back with a status update. We implemented Austin's suggestion to
make wildcards in partial type signatures behave like holes.
Let's demonstrate the new behaviour with an example. The example
program:
module Example where
foo :: (Show _a, _) = _a - _
foo x = show (succ x)
Compiled
Yay!
I have nothing else constructive to say, at the moment.
What's the next step from your point of view? Are there unimplemented bits of
this?
Thanks for doing this!
Richard
On Apr 10, 2014, at 3:48 AM, Thomas Winant thomas.win...@cs.kuleuven.be wrote:
Hi,
I'm back with a status
