X-Git-Url: http://git.megacz.com/?a=blobdiff_plain;f=docs%2Fusers_guide%2Fglasgow_exts.xml;h=b1e9c3127296a53b15563143520271b46c4a3688;hb=a975e8341a53ec9cef25af816a9bf9ce96c16391;hp=7e78c7299c9a69de6afc5bc800e1e6bd85711f93;hpb=6a05ec5ef5373f61b7f9f5bdc344483417fa801b;p=ghc-hetmet.git
diff --git a/docs/users_guide/glasgow_exts.xml b/docs/users_guide/glasgow_exts.xml
index 7e78c72..b1e9c31 100644
--- a/docs/users_guide/glasgow_exts.xml
+++ b/docs/users_guide/glasgow_exts.xml
@@ -1744,11 +1744,6 @@ dictionaries for Eq and Show respectively,
extract it on pattern matching.
-
-Notice the way that the syntax fits smoothly with that used for
-universal quantification earlier.
-
-
@@ -2021,9 +2016,9 @@ In the example, the equality dictionary is used to satisfy the equality constrai
generated by the call to elem, so that the type of
insert itself has no Eq constraint.
-This behaviour contrasts with Haskell 98's peculiar treament of
+This behaviour contrasts with Haskell 98's peculiar treatment of
contexts on a data type declaration (Section 4.2.1 of the Haskell 98 Report).
-In Haskell 98 the defintion
+In Haskell 98 the definition
data Eq a => Set' a = MkSet' [a]
@@ -2132,7 +2127,7 @@ field f must be the same (modulo alpha conversion).
At the moment, record updates are not yet possible with GADT-style declarations,
so support is limited to record construction, selection and pattern matching.
-For exmaple
+For example
aPerson = Adult { name = "Fred", children = [] }
@@ -2239,7 +2234,7 @@ constructor).
You cannot use a deriving clause for a GADT; only for
-an ordianary data type.
+an ordinary data type.
@@ -2307,7 +2302,7 @@ The third is not Haskell 98, and risks losing termination of instances.
GHC takes a conservative position: it accepts the first two, but not the third. The rule is this:
each constraint in the inferred instance context must consist only of type variables,
-with no repititions.
+with no repetitions.
This rule is applied regardless of flags. If you want a more exotic context, you can write
@@ -2343,7 +2338,7 @@ For example:
deriving instance MonadState Int Foo
GHC always treats the last parameter of the instance
-(Foo in this exmample) as the type whose instance is being derived.
+(Foo in this example) as the type whose instance is being derived.
@@ -3259,7 +3254,7 @@ by which time more is known about the type b.
The willingness to be overlapped or incoherent is a property of
the instance declaration itself, controlled by the
presence or otherwise of the
-and flags when that mdodule is
+and flags when that module is
being defined. Neither flag is required in a module that imports and uses the
instance declaration. Specifically, during the lookup process:
@@ -3372,7 +3367,7 @@ instance IsString [Char] where
fromString cs = cs
The class IsString is not in scope by default. If you want to mention
-it explicitly (for exmaple, to give an instance declaration for it), you can import it
+it explicitly (for example, to give an instance declaration for it), you can import it
from module GHC.Exts.
@@ -3553,7 +3548,7 @@ J Lewis, MB Shields, E Meijer, J Launchbury,
Boston, Jan 2000.
-(Most of the following, stil rather incomplete, documentation is
+(Most of the following, still rather incomplete, documentation is
due to Jeff Lewis.)Implicit parameter support is enabled with the option
@@ -3733,7 +3728,7 @@ In the former case, len_acc1 is monomorphic in its own
right-hand side, so the implicit parameter ?acc is not
passed to the recursive call. In the latter case, because len_acc2
has a type signature, the recursive call is made to the
-polymoprhic version, which takes ?acc
+polymorphic version, which takes ?acc
as an implicit parameter. So we get the following results in GHCi:
Prog> len1 "hello"
@@ -3858,7 +3853,7 @@ Other points:
'?x' and '%x'
are entirely distinct implicit parameters: you
- can use them together and they won't intefere with each other.
+ can use them together and they won't interfere with each other. You can bind linear implicit parameters in 'with' clauses.
@@ -4371,7 +4366,7 @@ a type. (This is a change from GHC's earlier
design.)Furthermore, distinct lexical type variables stand for distinct
type variables. This means that every programmer-written type signature
-(includin one that contains free scoped type variables) denotes a
+(including one that contains free scoped type variables) denotes a
rigid type; that is, the type is fully known to the type
checker, and no inference is involved.Lexical type variables may be alpha-renamed freely, without
@@ -4388,7 +4383,7 @@ A lexically scoped type variable can be bound by:
-In Haskell, a programmer-written type signature is implicitly quantifed over
+In Haskell, a programmer-written type signature is implicitly quantified over
its free type variables (Section
4.1.2
@@ -4463,7 +4458,7 @@ For example:
g (x::a) = x
h ((x,y) :: (Int,Bool)) = (y,x)
-In the case where all the type variables in the pattern type sigature are
+In the case where all the type variables in the pattern type signature are
already in scope (i.e. bound by the enclosing context), matters are simple: the
signature simply constrains the type of the pattern in the obvious way.
@@ -4489,7 +4484,7 @@ existentially-bound type variable.
If this seems a little odd, we think so too. But we must have
some way to bring such type variables into scope, else we
-could not name existentially-bound type variables in subequent type signatures.
+could not name existentially-bound type variables in subsequent type signatures.
This is (now) the only situation in which a pattern type
@@ -4614,12 +4609,12 @@ This is rejected by Haskell 98, but under Jones's scheme the definition for
g is typechecked first, separately from that for
f,
because the reference to f in g's right
-hand side is ingored by the dependency analysis. Then g's
+hand side is ignored by the dependency analysis. Then g's
type is generalised, to get
g :: Ord a => a -> Bool
-Now, the defintion for f is typechecked, with this type for
+Now, the definition for f is typechecked, with this type for
g in the type environment.
@@ -4910,7 +4905,7 @@ The basic idea is to compile the program twice:Then compile it again with , and
additionally use
- to name the object files differentliy (you can choose any suffix
+ to name the object files differently (you can choose any suffix
that isn't the normal object suffix here). GHC will automatically
load the object files built in the first step when executing splice
expressions. If you omit the flag when
@@ -5468,7 +5463,7 @@ g6 x = case f x of { y -> body }
g7 x = case f x of { !y -> body }
The functions g5 and g6 mean exactly the same thing.
-But g7 evalutes (f x), binds y to the
+But g7 evaluates (f x), binds y to the
result, and then evaluates body.
Bang patterns work in let and where
@@ -5781,7 +5776,7 @@ Assertion failures can be caught, see the documentation for the
When you compile any module that imports and uses any
of the specified entities, GHC will print the specified
message.
- You can only depecate entities declared at top level in the module
+ You can only deprecate entities declared at top level in the module
being compiled, and you can only use unqualified names in the list of
entities being deprecated. A capitalised name, such as T
refers to either the type constructor T
@@ -6013,7 +6008,7 @@ happen.
{-# SPECIALIZE f :: <type> #-}
- is valid if and only if the defintion
+ is valid if and only if the definition
f_spec :: <type>
f_spec = f
@@ -6038,7 +6033,7 @@ well. If you use this kind of specialisation, let us know how well it works.
A SPECIALIZE pragma can optionally be followed with a
INLINE or NOINLINE pragma, optionally
followed by a phase, as described in .
-The INLINE pragma affects the specialised verison of the
+The INLINE pragma affects the specialised version of the
function (only), and applies even if the function is recursive. The motivating
example is this:
@@ -6734,7 +6729,7 @@ If you add you get a more detailed listing.
- The definition of (say) build in GHC/Base.lhs looks llike this:
+ The definition of (say) build in GHC/Base.lhs looks like this:
build :: forall a. (forall b. (a -> b -> b) -> b -> b) -> [a]
@@ -6831,7 +6826,7 @@ r) ->
Special built-in functions
-GHC has a few built-in funcions with special behaviour. These
+GHC has a few built-in functions with special behaviour. These
are now described in the module GHC.Prim
in the library documentation.
@@ -7001,7 +6996,7 @@ So this too is illegal:
op2 :: a -> Bool
op2 {| p :*: q |} (x :*: y) = False
-(The reason for this restriction is that we gather all the equations for a particular type consructor
+(The reason for this restriction is that we gather all the equations for a particular type constructor
into a single generic instance declaration.)
@@ -7032,7 +7027,7 @@ Here, op1, op2, op3 are OK, but op4 is rejected, because it has a type variable
inside a list.
-This restriction is an implementation restriction: we just havn't got around to
+This restriction is an implementation restriction: we just haven't got around to
implementing the necessary bidirectional maps over arbitrary type constructors.
It would be relatively easy to add specific type constructors, such as Maybe and list,
to the ones that are allowed.