+ mappM (addErrTc . badMethodErr clas) bad_bndrs `thenM_`
+
+ -- Make the method bindings
+ let
+ mk_method_bind = mkMethodBind InstanceDeclOrigin clas inst_tys' monobinds
+ in
+ mapAndUnzipM mk_method_bind op_items `thenM` \ (meth_insts, meth_infos) ->
+
+ -- And type check them
+ -- It's really worth making meth_insts available to the tcMethodBind
+ -- Consider instance Monad (ST s) where
+ -- {-# INLINE (>>) #-}
+ -- (>>) = ...(>>=)...
+ -- If we don't include meth_insts, we end up with bindings like this:
+ -- rec { dict = MkD then bind ...
+ -- then = inline_me (... (GHC.Base.>>= dict) ...)
+ -- bind = ... }
+ -- The trouble is that (a) 'then' and 'dict' are mutually recursive,
+ -- and (b) the inline_me prevents us inlining the >>= selector, which
+ -- would unravel the loop. Result: (>>) ends up as a loop breaker, and
+ -- is not inlined across modules. Rather ironic since this does not
+ -- happen without the INLINE pragma!
+ --
+ -- Solution: make meth_insts available, so that 'then' refers directly
+ -- to the local 'bind' rather than going via the dictionary.
+ --
+ -- BUT WATCH OUT! If the method type mentions the class variable, then
+ -- this optimisation is not right. Consider
+ -- class C a where
+ -- op :: Eq a => a
+ --
+ -- instance C Int where
+ -- op = op
+ -- The occurrence of 'op' on the rhs gives rise to a constraint
+ -- op at Int
+ -- The trouble is that the 'meth_inst' for op, which is 'available', also
+ -- looks like 'op at Int'. But they are not the same.
+ let
+ all_insts = avail_insts ++ catMaybes meth_insts
+ xtve = inst_tyvars `zip` inst_tyvars'
+ tc_method_bind = tcMethodBind xtve inst_tyvars' dfun_theta' all_insts uprags
+ in
+ mapM tc_method_bind meth_infos `thenM` \ meth_binds_s ->
+
+ returnM ([meth_id | (_,meth_id,_) <- meth_infos],
+ unionManyBags meth_binds_s)
+
+
+-- Derived newtype instances
+tcMethods clas inst_tyvars inst_tyvars' dfun_theta' inst_tys'
+ avail_insts op_items (NewTypeDerived rep_tys)
+ = getInstLoc InstanceDeclOrigin `thenM` \ inst_loc ->
+ mapAndUnzip3M (do_one inst_loc) op_items `thenM` \ (meth_ids, meth_binds, rhs_insts) ->
+
+ tcSimplifyCheck
+ (ptext SLIT("newtype derived instance"))
+ inst_tyvars' avail_insts rhs_insts `thenM` \ lie_binds ->
+
+ -- I don't think we have to do the checkSigTyVars thing
+
+ returnM (meth_ids, lie_binds `unionBags` listToBag meth_binds)
+
+ where
+ do_one inst_loc (sel_id, _)
+ = -- The binding is like "op @ NewTy = op @ RepTy"
+ -- Make the *binder*, like in mkMethodBind
+ tcInstClassOp inst_loc sel_id inst_tys' `thenM` \ meth_inst ->
+
+ -- Make the *occurrence on the rhs*
+ tcInstClassOp inst_loc sel_id rep_tys' `thenM` \ rhs_inst ->
+ let
+ meth_id = instToId meth_inst
+ in
+ return (meth_id, noLoc (VarBind meth_id (nlHsVar (instToId rhs_inst))), rhs_inst)
+
+ -- Instantiate rep_tys with the relevant type variables
+ rep_tys' = map (substTy subst) rep_tys
+ subst = mkTyVarSubst inst_tyvars (mkTyVarTys inst_tyvars')
+\end{code}
+
+Note: [Superclass loops]
+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
+We have to be very, very careful when generating superclasses, lest we
+accidentally build a loop. Here's an example:
+
+ class S a
+
+ class S a => C a where { opc :: a -> a }
+ class S b => D b where { opd :: b -> b }
+
+ instance C Int where
+ opc = opd
+
+ instance D Int where
+ opd = opc
+
+From (instance C Int) we get the constraint set {ds1:S Int, dd:D Int}
+Simplifying, we may well get:
+ $dfCInt = :C ds1 (opd dd)
+ dd = $dfDInt
+ ds1 = $p1 dd
+Notice that we spot that we can extract ds1 from dd.
+
+Alas! Alack! We can do the same for (instance D Int):
+
+ $dfDInt = :D ds2 (opc dc)
+ dc = $dfCInt
+ ds2 = $p1 dc
+
+And now we've defined the superclass in terms of itself.
+
+
+Solution: treat the superclass context separately, and simplify it
+all the way down to nothing on its own. Don't toss any 'free' parts
+out to be simplified together with other bits of context.
+Hence the tcSimplifyTop below.
+
+At a more basic level, don't include this_dict in the context wrt
+which we simplify sc_dicts, else sc_dicts get bound by just selecting
+from this_dict!!
+
+\begin{code}
+tcSuperClasses inst_tyvars' dfun_arg_dicts sc_dicts
+ = addErrCtxt superClassCtxt $
+ getLIE (tcSimplifyCheck doc inst_tyvars'
+ dfun_arg_dicts
+ sc_dicts) `thenM` \ (sc_binds1, sc_lie) ->
+
+ -- It's possible that the superclass stuff might have done unification
+ checkSigTyVars inst_tyvars' `thenM` \ zonked_inst_tyvars ->
+
+ -- We must simplify this all the way down
+ -- lest we build superclass loops
+ -- See Note [Superclass loops] above
+ tcSimplifyTop sc_lie `thenM` \ sc_binds2 ->
+
+ returnM (zonked_inst_tyvars, sc_binds1, sc_binds2)
+
+ where
+ doc = ptext SLIT("instance declaration superclass context")