+tcInstDecl2 :: InstInfo Name -> TcM (LHsBinds Id)
+ -- Returns a binding for the dfun
+tcInstDecl2 (InstInfo { iSpec = ispec, iBinds = ibinds })
+ = recoverM (return emptyLHsBinds) $
+ setSrcSpan loc $
+ addErrCtxt (instDeclCtxt2 (idType dfun_id)) $
+ do { -- Instantiate the instance decl with skolem constants
+ ; (inst_tyvars, dfun_theta, inst_head) <- tcSkolDFunType (idType dfun_id)
+ ; let (clas, inst_tys) = tcSplitDFunHead inst_head
+ (class_tyvars, sc_theta, _, op_items) = classBigSig clas
+ sc_theta' = substTheta (zipOpenTvSubst class_tyvars inst_tys) sc_theta
+ n_ty_args = length inst_tyvars
+ n_silent = dfunNSilent dfun_id
+ (silent_theta, orig_theta) = splitAt n_silent dfun_theta
+
+ ; silent_ev_vars <- mapM newSilentGiven silent_theta
+ ; orig_ev_vars <- newEvVars orig_theta
+ ; let dfun_ev_vars = silent_ev_vars ++ orig_ev_vars
+
+ ; (sc_dicts, sc_args)
+ <- mapAndUnzipM (tcSuperClass n_ty_args dfun_ev_vars) sc_theta'
+
+ -- Check that any superclasses gotten from a silent arguemnt
+ -- can be deduced from the originally-specified dfun arguments
+ ; ct_loc <- getCtLoc ScOrigin
+ ; _ <- checkConstraints skol_info inst_tyvars orig_ev_vars $
+ emitFlats $ listToBag $
+ [ mkEvVarX sc ct_loc | sc <- sc_dicts, isSilentEvVar sc ]
+
+ -- Deal with 'SPECIALISE instance' pragmas
+ -- See Note [SPECIALISE instance pragmas]
+ ; spec_info@(spec_inst_prags,_) <- tcSpecInstPrags dfun_id ibinds
+
+ -- Typecheck the methods
+ ; (meth_ids, meth_binds)
+ <- tcExtendTyVarEnv inst_tyvars $
+ -- The inst_tyvars scope over the 'where' part
+ -- Those tyvars are inside the dfun_id's type, which is a bit
+ -- bizarre, but OK so long as you realise it!
+ tcInstanceMethods dfun_id clas inst_tyvars dfun_ev_vars
+ inst_tys spec_info
+ op_items ibinds
+
+ -- Create the result bindings
+ ; self_dict <- newEvVar (ClassP clas inst_tys)
+ ; let class_tc = classTyCon clas
+ [dict_constr] = tyConDataCons class_tc
+ dict_bind = mkVarBind self_dict dict_rhs
+ dict_rhs = foldl mk_app inst_constr $
+ map HsVar sc_dicts ++ map (wrapId arg_wrapper) meth_ids
+ inst_constr = L loc $ wrapId (mkWpTyApps inst_tys)
+ (dataConWrapId dict_constr)
+ -- We don't produce a binding for the dict_constr; instead we
+ -- rely on the simplifier to unfold this saturated application
+ -- We do this rather than generate an HsCon directly, because
+ -- it means that the special cases (e.g. dictionary with only one
+ -- member) are dealt with by the common MkId.mkDataConWrapId
+ -- code rather than needing to be repeated here.
+
+ mk_app :: LHsExpr Id -> HsExpr Id -> LHsExpr Id
+ mk_app fun arg = L loc (HsApp fun (L loc arg))
+
+ arg_wrapper = mkWpEvVarApps dfun_ev_vars <.> mkWpTyApps (mkTyVarTys inst_tyvars)
+
+ -- Do not inline the dfun; instead give it a magic DFunFunfolding
+ -- See Note [ClassOp/DFun selection]
+ -- See also note [Single-method classes]
+ dfun_id_w_fun
+ | isNewTyCon class_tc
+ = dfun_id `setInlinePragma` alwaysInlinePragma { inl_sat = Just 0 }
+ | otherwise
+ = dfun_id `setIdUnfolding` mkDFunUnfolding dfun_ty (sc_args ++ meth_args)
+ `setInlinePragma` dfunInlinePragma
+ meth_args = map (DFunPolyArg . Var) meth_ids
+
+ main_bind = AbsBinds { abs_tvs = inst_tyvars
+ , abs_ev_vars = dfun_ev_vars
+ , abs_exports = [(inst_tyvars, dfun_id_w_fun, self_dict,
+ SpecPrags spec_inst_prags)]
+ , abs_ev_binds = emptyTcEvBinds
+ , abs_binds = unitBag dict_bind }
+
+ ; return (unitBag (L loc main_bind) `unionBags`
+ listToBag meth_binds)
+ }
+ where
+ skol_info = InstSkol -- See Note [Subtle interaction of recursion and overlap]
+ dfun_ty = idType dfun_id
+ dfun_id = instanceDFunId ispec
+ loc = getSrcSpan dfun_id
+
+------------------------------
+tcSuperClass :: Int -> [EvVar] -> PredType -> TcM (EvVar, DFunArg CoreExpr)
+-- All superclasses should be either
+-- (a) be one of the arguments to the dfun, of
+-- (b) be a constant, soluble at top level
+tcSuperClass n_ty_args ev_vars pred
+ | Just (ev, i) <- find n_ty_args ev_vars
+ = return (ev, DFunLamArg i)
+ | otherwise
+ = ASSERT2( isEmptyVarSet (tyVarsOfPred pred), ppr pred) -- Constant!
+ do { sc_dict <- emitWanted ScOrigin pred
+ ; return (sc_dict, DFunConstArg (Var sc_dict)) }
+ where
+ find _ [] = Nothing
+ find i (ev:evs) | pred `eqPred` evVarPred ev = Just (ev, i)
+ | otherwise = find (i+1) evs
+
+------------------------------
+tcSpecInstPrags :: DFunId -> InstBindings Name
+ -> TcM ([Located TcSpecPrag], PragFun)
+tcSpecInstPrags _ (NewTypeDerived {})
+ = return ([], \_ -> [])
+tcSpecInstPrags dfun_id (VanillaInst binds uprags _)
+ = do { spec_inst_prags <- mapM (wrapLocM (tcSpecInst dfun_id)) $
+ filter isSpecInstLSig uprags
+ -- The filter removes the pragmas for methods
+ ; return (spec_inst_prags, mkPragFun uprags binds) }
+\end{code}
+
+Note [Silent Superclass Arguments]
+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
+Consider the following (extreme) situation:
+ class C a => D a where ...
+ instance D [a] => D [a] where ...
+Although this looks wrong (assume D [a] to prove D [a]), it is only a
+more extreme case of what happens with recursive dictionaries.
+
+To implement the dfun we must generate code for the superclass C [a],
+which we can get by superclass selection from the supplied argument!
+So we’d generate:
+ dfun :: forall a. D [a] -> D [a]
+ dfun = \d::D [a] -> MkD (scsel d) ..
+
+However this means that if we later encounter a situation where
+we have a [Wanted] dw::D [a] we could solve it thus:
+ dw := dfun dw
+Although recursive, this binding would pass the TcSMonadisGoodRecEv
+check because it appears as guarded. But in reality, it will make a
+bottom superclass. The trouble is that isGoodRecEv can't "see" the
+superclass-selection inside dfun.
+
+Our solution to this problem is to change the way ‘dfuns’ are created
+for instances, so that we pass as first arguments to the dfun some
+``silent superclass arguments’’, which are the immediate superclasses
+of the dictionary we are trying to construct. In our example:
+ dfun :: forall a. (C [a], D [a] -> D [a]
+ dfun = \(dc::C [a]) (dd::D [a]) -> DOrd dc ...
+
+This gives us:
+
+ -----------------------------------------------------------
+ DFun Superclass Invariant
+ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
+ In the body of a DFun, every superclass argument to the
+ returned dictionary is
+ either * one of the arguments of the DFun,
+ or * constant, bound at top level
+ -----------------------------------------------------------
+
+This means that no superclass is hidden inside a dfun application, so
+the counting argument in isGoodRecEv (more dfun calls than superclass
+selections) works correctly.
+
+The extra arguments required to satisfy the DFun Superclass Invariant
+always come first, and are called the "silent" arguments. DFun types
+are built (only) by MkId.mkDictFunId, so that is where we decide
+what silent arguments are to be added.
+
+This net effect is that it is safe to treat a dfun application as
+wrapping a dictionary constructor around its arguments (in particular,
+a dfun never picks superclasses from the arguments under the dictionary
+constructor).
+
+In our example, if we had [Wanted] dw :: D [a] we would get via the instance:
+ dw := dfun d1 d2
+ [Wanted] (d1 :: C [a])
+ [Wanted] (d2 :: D [a])
+ [Derived] (d :: D [a])
+ [Derived] (scd :: C [a]) scd := scsel d
+ [Derived] (scd2 :: C [a]) scd2 := scsel d2
+
+And now, though we *can* solve:
+ d2 := dw
+we will get an isGoodRecEv failure when we try to solve:
+ d1 := scsel d
+ or
+ d1 := scsel d2
+
+Test case SCLoop tests this fix.
+
+Note [SPECIALISE instance pragmas]
+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
+Consider
+
+ instance (Ix a, Ix b) => Ix (a,b) where
+ {-# SPECIALISE instance Ix (Int,Int) #-}
+ range (x,y) = ...
+
+We do *not* want to make a specialised version of the dictionary
+function. Rather, we want specialised versions of each method.
+Thus we should generate something like this:
+
+ $dfIx :: (Ix a, Ix x) => Ix (a,b)
+ {- DFUN [$crange, ...] -}
+ $dfIx da db = Ix ($crange da db) (...other methods...)
+
+ $dfIxPair :: (Ix a, Ix x) => Ix (a,b)
+ {- DFUN [$crangePair, ...] -}
+ $dfIxPair = Ix ($crangePair da db) (...other methods...)
+
+ $crange :: (Ix a, Ix b) -> ((a,b),(a,b)) -> [(a,b)]
+ {-# SPECIALISE $crange :: ((Int,Int),(Int,Int)) -> [(Int,Int)] #-}
+ $crange da db = <blah>
+
+ {-# RULE range ($dfIx da db) = $crange da db #-}
+
+Note that
+
+ * The RULE is unaffected by the specialisation. We don't want to
+ specialise $dfIx, because then it would need a specialised RULE
+ which is a pain. The single RULE works fine at all specialisations.
+ See Note [How instance declarations are translated] above
+
+ * Instead, we want to specialise the *method*, $crange
+
+In practice, rather than faking up a SPECIALISE pragama for each
+method (which is painful, since we'd have to figure out its
+specialised type), we call tcSpecPrag *as if* were going to specialise
+$dfIx -- you can see that in the call to tcSpecInst. That generates a
+SpecPrag which, as it turns out, can be used unchanged for each method.
+The "it turns out" bit is delicate, but it works fine!