<indexterm><primary>extensions</primary><secondary>options controlling</secondary>
</indexterm>
- <para>The language option flag control what variation of the language are
+ <para>The language option flags control what variation of the language are
permitted. Leaving out all of them gives you standard Haskell
98.</para>
- <para>Generally speaking, all the language options are introduced by "<option>-X</option>",
- e.g. <option>-XTemplateHaskell</option>.
- </para>
-
- <para> All the language options can be turned off by using the prefix "<option>No</option>";
- e.g. "<option>-XNoTemplateHaskell</option>".</para>
-
- <para> Language options recognised by Cabal can also be enabled using the <literal>LANGUAGE</literal> pragma,
- thus <literal>{-# LANGUAGE TemplateHaskell #-}</literal> (see <xref linkend="language-pragma"/>>). </para>
-
- <para>Turning on an option that enables special syntax
- <emphasis>might</emphasis> cause working Haskell 98 code to fail
- to compile, perhaps because it uses a variable name which has
- become a reserved word. So, together with each option below, we
- list the special syntax which is enabled by this option. We use
- notation and nonterminal names from the Haskell 98 lexical syntax
- (see the Haskell 98 Report). There are two classes of special
- syntax:</para>
-
+ <para>Language options can be controlled in two ways:
<itemizedlist>
- <listitem>
- <para>New reserved words and symbols: character sequences
- which are no longer available for use as identifiers in the
- program.</para>
- </listitem>
- <listitem>
- <para>Other special syntax: sequences of characters that have
- a different meaning when this particular option is turned
- on.</para>
- </listitem>
- </itemizedlist>
-
- <para>We are only listing syntax changes here that might affect
- existing working programs (i.e. "stolen" syntax). Many of these
- extensions will also enable new context-free syntax, but in all
- cases programs written to use the new syntax would not be
- compilable without the option enabled.</para>
-
- <variablelist>
-
- <varlistentry>
- <term>
- <option>-fglasgow-exts</option>:
+ <listitem><para>Every language option can switched on by a command-line flag "<option>-X...</option>"
+ (e.g. <option>-XTemplateHaskell</option>), and switched off by the flag "<option>-XNo...</option>";
+ (e.g. <option>-XNoTemplateHaskell</option>).</para></listitem>
+ <listitem><para>
+ Language options recognised by Cabal can also be enabled using the <literal>LANGUAGE</literal> pragma,
+ thus <literal>{-# LANGUAGE TemplateHaskell #-}</literal> (see <xref linkend="language-pragma"/>). </para>
+ </listitem>
+ </itemizedlist></para>
+
+ <para>The flag <option>-fglasgow-exts</option>
<indexterm><primary><option>-fglasgow-exts</option></primary></indexterm>
- </term>
- <listitem>
- <para>This simultaneously enables all of the extensions to
- Haskell 98 described in <xref
- linkend="ghc-language-features"/>, except where otherwise
- noted. We are trying to move away from this portmanteau flag,
+ is equivalent to enabling the following extensions:
+ <option>-XPrintExplicitForalls</option>,
+ <option>-XForeignFunctionInterface</option>,
+ <option>-XUnliftedFFITypes</option>,
+ <option>-XGADTs</option>,
+ <option>-XImplicitParams</option>,
+ <option>-XScopedTypeVariables</option>,
+ <option>-XUnboxedTuples</option>,
+ <option>-XTypeSynonymInstances</option>,
+ <option>-XStandaloneDeriving</option>,
+ <option>-XDeriveDataTypeable</option>,
+ <option>-XFlexibleContexts</option>,
+ <option>-XFlexibleInstances</option>,
+ <option>-XConstrainedClassMethods</option>,
+ <option>-XMultiParamTypeClasses</option>,
+ <option>-XFunctionalDependencies</option>,
+ <option>-XMagicHash</option>,
+ <option>-XPolymorphicComponents</option>,
+ <option>-XExistentialQuantification</option>,
+ <option>-XUnicodeSyntax</option>,
+ <option>-XPostfixOperators</option>,
+ <option>-XPatternGuards</option>,
+ <option>-XLiberalTypeSynonyms</option>,
+ <option>-XExplicitForAll</option>,
+ <option>-XRankNTypes</option>,
+ <option>-XImpredicativeTypes</option>,
+ <option>-XTypeOperators</option>,
+ <option>-XDoRec</option>,
+ <option>-XParallelListComp</option>,
+ <option>-XEmptyDataDecls</option>,
+ <option>-XKindSignatures</option>,
+ <option>-XGeneralizedNewtypeDeriving</option>,
+ <option>-XTypeFamilies</option>.
+ Enabling these options is the <emphasis>only</emphasis>
+ effect of <option>-fglasgow-exts</option>.
+ We are trying to move away from this portmanteau flag,
and towards enabling features individually.</para>
- <para>New reserved words: <literal>forall</literal> (only in
- types), <literal>mdo</literal>.</para>
-
- <para>Other syntax stolen:
- <replaceable>varid</replaceable>{<literal>#</literal>},
- <replaceable>char</replaceable><literal>#</literal>,
- <replaceable>string</replaceable><literal>#</literal>,
- <replaceable>integer</replaceable><literal>#</literal>,
- <replaceable>float</replaceable><literal>#</literal>,
- <replaceable>float</replaceable><literal>##</literal>,
- <literal>(#</literal>, <literal>#)</literal>,
- <literal>|)</literal>, <literal>{|</literal>.</para>
-
- <para>Implies these specific language options:
- <option>-XForeignFunctionInterface</option>,
- <option>-XImplicitParams</option>,
- <option>-XScopedTypeVariables</option>,
- <option>-XGADTs</option>,
- <option>-XTypeFamilies</option>. </para>
- </listitem>
- </varlistentry>
-
- <varlistentry>
- <term>
- <option>-XForeignFunctionInterface</option>:
- <indexterm><primary><option>-XForeignFunctionInterface</option></primary></indexterm>
- </term>
- <listitem>
- <para>This option enables the language extension defined in the
- Haskell 98 Foreign Function Interface Addendum.</para>
-
- <para>New reserved words: <literal>foreign</literal>.</para>
- </listitem>
- </varlistentry>
-
- <varlistentry>
- <term>
- <option>-XMonomorphismRestriction</option>,<option>-XMonoPatBinds</option>:
- </term>
- <listitem>
- <para> These two flags control how generalisation is done.
- See <xref linkend="monomorphism"/>.
- </para>
- </listitem>
- </varlistentry>
-
- <varlistentry>
- <term>
- <option>-XExtendedDefaultRules</option>:
- <indexterm><primary><option>-XExtendedDefaultRules</option></primary></indexterm>
- </term>
- <listitem>
- <para> Use GHCi's extended default rules in a regular module (<xref linkend="extended-default-rules"/>).
- Independent of the <option>-fglasgow-exts</option>
- flag. </para>
- </listitem>
- </varlistentry>
-
- <varlistentry>
- <term>
- <option>-XOverlappingInstances</option>
- <indexterm><primary><option>-XOverlappingInstances</option></primary></indexterm>
- </term>
- <term>
- <option>-XUndecidableInstances</option>
- <indexterm><primary><option>-XUndecidableInstances</option></primary></indexterm>
- </term>
- <term>
- <option>-XIncoherentInstances</option>
- <indexterm><primary><option>-XIncoherentInstances</option></primary></indexterm>
- </term>
- <term>
- <option>-fcontext-stack=N</option>
- <indexterm><primary><option>-fcontext-stack</option></primary></indexterm>
- </term>
- <listitem>
- <para> See <xref linkend="instance-decls"/>. Only relevant
- if you also use <option>-fglasgow-exts</option>.</para>
- </listitem>
- </varlistentry>
-
- <varlistentry>
- <term>
- <option>-finline-phase</option>
- <indexterm><primary><option>-finline-phase</option></primary></indexterm>
- </term>
- <listitem>
- <para>See <xref linkend="rewrite-rules"/>. Only relevant if
- you also use <option>-fglasgow-exts</option>.</para>
- </listitem>
- </varlistentry>
-
- <varlistentry>
- <term>
- <option>-XArrows</option>
- <indexterm><primary><option>-XArrows</option></primary></indexterm>
- </term>
- <listitem>
- <para>See <xref linkend="arrow-notation"/>. Independent of
- <option>-fglasgow-exts</option>.</para>
-
- <para>New reserved words/symbols: <literal>rec</literal>,
- <literal>proc</literal>, <literal>-<</literal>,
- <literal>>-</literal>, <literal>-<<</literal>,
- <literal>>>-</literal>.</para>
-
- <para>Other syntax stolen: <literal>(|</literal>,
- <literal>|)</literal>.</para>
- </listitem>
- </varlistentry>
-
- <varlistentry>
- <term>
- <option>-XGenerics</option>
- <indexterm><primary><option>-XGenerics</option></primary></indexterm>
- </term>
- <listitem>
- <para>See <xref linkend="generic-classes"/>. Independent of
- <option>-fglasgow-exts</option>.</para>
- </listitem>
- </varlistentry>
-
- <varlistentry>
- <term><option>-XNoImplicitPrelude</option></term>
- <listitem>
- <para><indexterm><primary>-XNoImplicitPrelude
- option</primary></indexterm> GHC normally imports
- <filename>Prelude.hi</filename> files for you. If you'd
- rather it didn't, then give it a
- <option>-XNoImplicitPrelude</option> option. The idea is
- that you can then import a Prelude of your own. (But don't
- call it <literal>Prelude</literal>; the Haskell module
- namespace is flat, and you must not conflict with any
- Prelude module.)</para>
-
- <para>Even though you have not imported the Prelude, most of
- the built-in syntax still refers to the built-in Haskell
- Prelude types and values, as specified by the Haskell
- Report. For example, the type <literal>[Int]</literal>
- still means <literal>Prelude.[] Int</literal>; tuples
- continue to refer to the standard Prelude tuples; the
- translation for list comprehensions continues to use
- <literal>Prelude.map</literal> etc.</para>
-
- <para>However, <option>-XNoImplicitPrelude</option> does
- change the handling of certain built-in syntax: see <xref
- linkend="rebindable-syntax"/>.</para>
- </listitem>
- </varlistentry>
-
- <varlistentry>
- <term><option>-XImplicitParams</option></term>
- <listitem>
- <para>Enables implicit parameters (see <xref
- linkend="implicit-parameters"/>). Currently also implied by
- <option>-fglasgow-exts</option>.</para>
-
- <para>Syntax stolen:
- <literal>?<replaceable>varid</replaceable></literal>,
- <literal>%<replaceable>varid</replaceable></literal>.</para>
- </listitem>
- </varlistentry>
-
- <varlistentry>
- <term><option>-XOverloadedStrings</option></term>
- <listitem>
- <para>Enables overloaded string literals (see <xref
- linkend="overloaded-strings"/>).</para>
- </listitem>
- </varlistentry>
-
- <varlistentry>
- <term><option>-XScopedTypeVariables</option></term>
- <listitem>
- <para>Enables lexically-scoped type variables (see <xref
- linkend="scoped-type-variables"/>). Implied by
- <option>-fglasgow-exts</option>.</para>
- </listitem>
- </varlistentry>
-
- <varlistentry>
- <term><option>-XTemplateHaskell</option></term>
- <listitem>
- <para>Enables Template Haskell (see <xref
- linkend="template-haskell"/>). This flag must
- be given explicitly; it is no longer implied by
- <option>-fglasgow-exts</option>.</para>
-
- <para>Syntax stolen: <literal>[|</literal>,
- <literal>[e|</literal>, <literal>[p|</literal>,
- <literal>[d|</literal>, <literal>[t|</literal>,
- <literal>$(</literal>,
- <literal>$<replaceable>varid</replaceable></literal>.</para>
- </listitem>
- </varlistentry>
-
- <varlistentry>
- <term><option>-XQuasiQuotes</option></term>
- <listitem>
- <para>Enables quasiquotation (see <xref
- linkend="th-quasiquotation"/>).</para>
-
- <para>Syntax stolen:
- <literal>[:<replaceable>varid</replaceable>|</literal>.</para>
- </listitem>
- </varlistentry>
-
- </variablelist>
</sect1>
<!-- UNBOXED TYPES AND PRIMITIVE OPERATIONS -->
<sect1 id="primitives">
<title>Unboxed types and primitive operations</title>
-<para>GHC is built on a raft of primitive data types and operations.
+<para>GHC is built on a raft of primitive data types and operations;
+"primitive" in the sense that they cannot be defined in Haskell itself.
While you really can use this stuff to write fast code,
we generally find it a lot less painful, and more satisfying in the
long run, to use higher-level language features and libraries. With
unboxed version in any case. And if it isn't, we'd like to know
about it.</para>
-<para>We do not currently have good, up-to-date documentation about the
-primitives, perhaps because they are mainly intended for internal use.
-There used to be a long section about them here in the User Guide, but it
-became out of date, and wrong information is worse than none.</para>
-
-<para>The Real Truth about what primitive types there are, and what operations
-work over those types, is held in the file
-<filename>fptools/ghc/compiler/prelude/primops.txt.pp</filename>.
-This file is used directly to generate GHC's primitive-operation definitions, so
-it is always correct! It is also intended for processing into text.</para>
-
-<para> Indeed,
-the result of such processing is part of the description of the
- <ulink
- url="http://www.haskell.org/ghc/docs/papers/core.ps.gz">External
- Core language</ulink>.
-So that document is a good place to look for a type-set version.
-We would be very happy if someone wanted to volunteer to produce an XML
-back end to the program that processes <filename>primops.txt</filename> so that
-we could include the results here in the User Guide.</para>
-
-<para>What follows here is a brief summary of some main points.</para>
+<para>All these primitive data types and operations are exported by the
+library <literal>GHC.Prim</literal>, for which there is
+<ulink url="&libraryGhcPrimLocation;/GHC-Prim.html">detailed online documentation</ulink>.
+(This documentation is generated from the file <filename>compiler/prelude/primops.txt.pp</filename>.)
+</para>
+<para>
+If you want to mention any of the primitive data types or operations in your
+program, you must first import <literal>GHC.Prim</literal> to bring them
+into scope. Many of them have names ending in "#", and to mention such
+names you need the <option>-XMagicHash</option> extension (<xref linkend="magic-hash"/>).
+</para>
+
+<para>The primops make extensive use of <link linkend="glasgow-unboxed">unboxed types</link>
+and <link linkend="unboxed-tuples">unboxed tuples</link>, which
+we briefly summarise here. </para>
<sect2 id="glasgow-unboxed">
<title>Unboxed types
Primitive (unboxed) types cannot be defined in Haskell, and are
therefore built into the language and compiler. Primitive types are
always unlifted; that is, a value of a primitive type cannot be
-bottom. We use the convention that primitive types, values, and
-operations have a <literal>#</literal> suffix.
+bottom. We use the convention (but it is only a convention)
+that primitive types, values, and
+operations have a <literal>#</literal> suffix (see <xref linkend="magic-hash"/>).
+For some primitive types we have special syntax for literals, also
+described in the <link linkend="magic-hash">same section</link>.
</para>
<para>
in a <emphasis>recursive</emphasis> binding.
</para></listitem>
<listitem><para> You may bind unboxed variables in a (non-recursive,
-non-top-level) pattern binding, but any such variable causes the entire
-pattern-match
-to become strict. For example:
+non-top-level) pattern binding, but you must make any such pattern-match
+strict. For example, rather than:
<programlisting>
data Foo = Foo Int Int#
f x = let (Foo a b, w) = ..rhs.. in ..body..
</programlisting>
-Since <literal>b</literal> has type <literal>Int#</literal>, the entire pattern
-match
-is strict, and the program behaves as if you had written
+you must write:
<programlisting>
data Foo = Foo Int Int#
- f x = case ..rhs.. of { (Foo a b, w) -> ..body.. }
+ f x = let !(Foo a b, w) = ..rhs.. in ..body..
</programlisting>
+since <literal>b</literal> has type <literal>Int#</literal>.
</para>
</listitem>
</itemizedlist>
<sect1 id="syntax-extns">
<title>Syntactic extensions</title>
+ <sect2 id="unicode-syntax">
+ <title>Unicode syntax</title>
+ <para>The language
+ extension <option>-XUnicodeSyntax</option><indexterm><primary><option>-XUnicodeSyntax</option></primary></indexterm>
+ enables Unicode characters to be used to stand for certain ASCII
+ character sequences. The following alternatives are provided:</para>
+
+ <informaltable>
+ <tgroup cols="2" align="left" colsep="1" rowsep="1">
+ <thead>
+ <row>
+ <entry>ASCII</entry>
+ <entry>Unicode alternative</entry>
+ <entry>Code point</entry>
+ <entry>Name</entry>
+ </row>
+ </thead>
+
+<!--
+ to find the DocBook entities for these characters, find
+ the Unicode code point (e.g. 0x2237), and grep for it in
+ /usr/share/sgml/docbook/xml-dtd-*/ent/* (or equivalent on
+ your system. Some of these Unicode code points don't have
+ equivalent DocBook entities.
+ -->
+
+ <tbody>
+ <row>
+ <entry><literal>::</literal></entry>
+ <entry>::</entry> <!-- no special char, apparently -->
+ <entry>0x2237</entry>
+ <entry>PROPORTION</entry>
+ </row>
+ </tbody>
+ <tbody>
+ <row>
+ <entry><literal>=></literal></entry>
+ <entry>⇒</entry>
+ <entry>0x21D2</entry>
+ <entry>RIGHTWARDS DOUBLE ARROW</entry>
+ </row>
+ </tbody>
+ <tbody>
+ <row>
+ <entry><literal>forall</literal></entry>
+ <entry>∀</entry>
+ <entry>0x2200</entry>
+ <entry>FOR ALL</entry>
+ </row>
+ </tbody>
+ <tbody>
+ <row>
+ <entry><literal>-></literal></entry>
+ <entry>→</entry>
+ <entry>0x2192</entry>
+ <entry>RIGHTWARDS ARROW</entry>
+ </row>
+ </tbody>
+ <tbody>
+ <row>
+ <entry><literal><-</literal></entry>
+ <entry>←</entry>
+ <entry>0x2190</entry>
+ <entry>LEFTWARDS ARROW</entry>
+ </row>
+ </tbody>
+
+ <tbody>
+ <row>
+ <entry>-<</entry>
+ <entry>↢</entry>
+ <entry>0x2919</entry>
+ <entry>LEFTWARDS ARROW-TAIL</entry>
+ </row>
+ </tbody>
+
+ <tbody>
+ <row>
+ <entry>>-</entry>
+ <entry>↣</entry>
+ <entry>0x291A</entry>
+ <entry>RIGHTWARDS ARROW-TAIL</entry>
+ </row>
+ </tbody>
+
+ <tbody>
+ <row>
+ <entry>-<<</entry>
+ <entry></entry>
+ <entry>0x291B</entry>
+ <entry>LEFTWARDS DOUBLE ARROW-TAIL</entry>
+ </row>
+ </tbody>
+
+ <tbody>
+ <row>
+ <entry>>>-</entry>
+ <entry></entry>
+ <entry>0x291C</entry>
+ <entry>RIGHTWARDS DOUBLE ARROW-TAIL</entry>
+ </row>
+ </tbody>
+
+ <tbody>
+ <row>
+ <entry>*</entry>
+ <entry>★</entry>
+ <entry>0x2605</entry>
+ <entry>BLACK STAR</entry>
+ </row>
+ </tbody>
+
+ </tgroup>
+ </informaltable>
+ </sect2>
+
+ <sect2 id="magic-hash">
+ <title>The magic hash</title>
+ <para>The language extension <option>-XMagicHash</option> allows "#" as a
+ postfix modifier to identifiers. Thus, "x#" is a valid variable, and "T#" is
+ a valid type constructor or data constructor.</para>
+
+ <para>The hash sign does not change sematics at all. We tend to use variable
+ names ending in "#" for unboxed values or types (e.g. <literal>Int#</literal>),
+ but there is no requirement to do so; they are just plain ordinary variables.
+ Nor does the <option>-XMagicHash</option> extension bring anything into scope.
+ For example, to bring <literal>Int#</literal> into scope you must
+ import <literal>GHC.Prim</literal> (see <xref linkend="primitives"/>);
+ the <option>-XMagicHash</option> extension
+ then allows you to <emphasis>refer</emphasis> to the <literal>Int#</literal>
+ that is now in scope.</para>
+ <para> The <option>-XMagicHash</option> also enables some new forms of literals (see <xref linkend="glasgow-unboxed"/>):
+ <itemizedlist>
+ <listitem><para> <literal>'x'#</literal> has type <literal>Char#</literal></para> </listitem>
+ <listitem><para> <literal>"foo"#</literal> has type <literal>Addr#</literal></para> </listitem>
+ <listitem><para> <literal>3#</literal> has type <literal>Int#</literal>. In general,
+ any Haskell 98 integer lexeme followed by a <literal>#</literal> is an <literal>Int#</literal> literal, e.g.
+ <literal>-0x3A#</literal> as well as <literal>32#</literal></para>.</listitem>
+ <listitem><para> <literal>3##</literal> has type <literal>Word#</literal>. In general,
+ any non-negative Haskell 98 integer lexeme followed by <literal>##</literal>
+ is a <literal>Word#</literal>. </para> </listitem>
+ <listitem><para> <literal>3.2#</literal> has type <literal>Float#</literal>.</para> </listitem>
+ <listitem><para> <literal>3.2##</literal> has type <literal>Double#</literal></para> </listitem>
+ </itemizedlist>
+ </para>
+ </sect2>
+
+ <sect2 id="new-qualified-operators">
+ <title>New qualified operator syntax</title>
+
+ <para>A new syntax for referencing qualified operators is
+ planned to be introduced by Haskell', and is enabled in GHC
+ with
+ the <option>-XNewQualifiedOperators</option><indexterm><primary><option>-XNewQualifiedOperators</option></primary></indexterm>
+ option. In the new syntax, the prefix form of a qualified
+ operator is
+ written <literal><replaceable>module</replaceable>.(<replaceable>symbol</replaceable>)</literal>
+ (in Haskell 98 this would
+ be <literal>(<replaceable>module</replaceable>.<replaceable>symbol</replaceable>)</literal>),
+ and the infix form is
+ written <literal>`<replaceable>module</replaceable>.(<replaceable>symbol</replaceable>)`</literal>
+ (in Haskell 98 this would
+ be <literal>`<replaceable>module</replaceable>.<replaceable>symbol</replaceable>`</literal>.
+ For example:
+<programlisting>
+ add x y = Prelude.(+) x y
+ subtract y = (`Prelude.(-)` y)
+</programlisting>
+ The new form of qualified operators is intended to regularise
+ the syntax by eliminating odd cases
+ like <literal>Prelude..</literal>. For example,
+ when <literal>NewQualifiedOperators</literal> is on, it is possible to
+ write the enumerated sequence <literal>[Monday..]</literal>
+ without spaces, whereas in Haskell 98 this would be a
+ reference to the operator ‘<literal>.</literal>‘
+ from module <literal>Monday</literal>.</para>
+
+ <para>When <option>-XNewQualifiedOperators</option> is on, the old Haskell
+ 98 syntax for qualified operators is not accepted, so this
+ option may cause existing Haskell 98 code to break.</para>
+
+ </sect2>
+
+
<!-- ====================== HIERARCHICAL MODULES ======================= -->
+
<sect2 id="hierarchical-modules">
<title>Hierarchical Modules</title>
</sect2>
+ <!-- ===================== n+k patterns =================== -->
+
+<sect2 id="n-k-patterns">
+<title>n+k patterns</title>
+<indexterm><primary><option>-XNoNPlusKPatterns</option></primary></indexterm>
+
+<para>
+<literal>n+k</literal> pattern support is enabled by default. To disable
+it, you can use the <option>-XNoNPlusKPatterns</option> flag.
+</para>
+
+</sect2>
+
<!-- ===================== Recursive do-notation =================== -->
-<sect2 id="mdo-notation">
+<sect2 id="recursive-do-notation">
<title>The recursive do-notation
</title>
-<para> The recursive do-notation (also known as mdo-notation) is implemented as described in
-<ulink url="http://citeseer.ist.psu.edu/erk02recursive.html">A recursive do for Haskell</ulink>,
-by Levent Erkok, John Launchbury,
-Haskell Workshop 2002, pages: 29-37. Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
-This paper is essential reading for anyone making non-trivial use of mdo-notation,
-and we do not repeat it here.
-</para>
<para>
-The do-notation of Haskell does not allow <emphasis>recursive bindings</emphasis>,
+The do-notation of Haskell 98 does not allow <emphasis>recursive bindings</emphasis>,
that is, the variables bound in a do-expression are visible only in the textually following
code block. Compare this to a let-expression, where bound variables are visible in the entire binding
group. It turns out that several applications can benefit from recursive bindings in
-the do-notation, and this extension provides the necessary syntactic support.
+the do-notation. The <option>-XDoRec</option> flag provides the necessary syntactic support.
</para>
<para>
-Here is a simple (yet contrived) example:
-</para>
+Here is a simple (albeit contrived) example:
<programlisting>
-import Control.Monad.Fix
-
-justOnes = mdo xs <- Just (1:xs)
- return xs
+{-# LANGUAGE DoRec #-}
+justOnes = do { rec { xs <- Just (1:xs) }
+ ; return (map negate xs) }
</programlisting>
+As you can guess <literal>justOnes</literal> will evaluate to <literal>Just [-1,-1,-1,...</literal>.
+</para>
<para>
-As you can guess <literal>justOnes</literal> will evaluate to <literal>Just [1,1,1,...</literal>.
+The background and motivation for recursive do-notation is described in
+<ulink url="http://sites.google.com/site/leventerkok/">A recursive do for Haskell</ulink>,
+by Levent Erkok, John Launchbury,
+Haskell Workshop 2002, pages: 29-37. Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
+The theory behind monadic value recursion is explained further in Erkok's thesis
+<ulink url="http://sites.google.com/site/leventerkok/erkok-thesis.pdf">Value Recursion in Monadic Computations</ulink>.
+However, note that GHC uses a different syntax than the one described in these documents.
</para>
+<sect3>
+<title>Details of recursive do-notation</title>
<para>
-The Control.Monad.Fix library introduces the <literal>MonadFix</literal> class. It's definition is:
+The recursive do-notation is enabled with the flag <option>-XDoRec</option> or, equivalently,
+the LANGUAGE pragma <option>DoRec</option>. It introduces the single new keyword "<literal>rec</literal>",
+which wraps a mutually-recursive group of monadic statements,
+producing a single statement.
</para>
+<para>Similar to a <literal>let</literal>
+statement, the variables bound in the <literal>rec</literal> are
+visible throughout the <literal>rec</literal> group, and below it.
+For example, compare
<programlisting>
-class Monad m => MonadFix m where
- mfix :: (a -> m a) -> m a
+do { a <- getChar do { a <- getChar
+ ; let { r1 = f a r2 ; rec { r1 <- f a r2
+ ; r2 = g r1 } ; r2 <- g r1 }
+ ; return (r1 ++ r2) } ; return (r1 ++ r2) }
</programlisting>
+In both cases, <literal>r1</literal> and <literal>r2</literal> are
+available both throughout the <literal>let</literal> or <literal>rec</literal> block, and
+in the statements that follow it. The difference is that <literal>let</literal> is non-monadic,
+while <literal>rec</literal> is monadic. (In Haskell <literal>let</literal> is
+really <literal>letrec</literal>, of course.)
+</para>
<para>
-The function <literal>mfix</literal>
-dictates how the required recursion operation should be performed. For example,
-<literal>justOnes</literal> desugars as follows:
+The static and dynamic semantics of <literal>rec</literal> can be described as follows:
+<itemizedlist>
+<listitem><para>
+First,
+similar to let-bindings, the <literal>rec</literal> is broken into
+minimal recursive groups, a process known as <emphasis>segmentation</emphasis>.
+For example:
+<programlisting>
+rec { a <- getChar ===> a <- getChar
+ ; b <- f a c rec { b <- f a c
+ ; c <- f b a ; c <- f b a }
+ ; putChar c } putChar c
+</programlisting>
+The details of segmentation are described in Section 3.2 of
+<ulink url="http://sites.google.com/site/leventerkok/">A recursive do for Haskell</ulink>.
+Segmentation improves polymorphism, reduces the size of the recursive "knot", and, as the paper
+describes, also has a semantic effect (unless the monad satisfies the right-shrinking law).
+</para></listitem>
+<listitem><para>
+Then each resulting <literal>rec</literal> is desugared, using a call to <literal>Control.Monad.Fix.mfix</literal>.
+For example, the <literal>rec</literal> group in the preceding example is desugared like this:
+<programlisting>
+rec { b <- f a c ===> (b,c) <- mfix (\~(b,c) -> do { b <- f a c
+ ; c <- f b a } ; c <- f b a
+ ; return (b,c) })
+</programlisting>
+In general, the statment <literal>rec <replaceable>ss</replaceable></literal>
+is desugared to the statement
<programlisting>
-justOnes = mfix (\xs' -> do { xs <- Just (1:xs'); return xs }
+<replaceable>vs</replaceable> <- mfix (\~<replaceable>vs</replaceable> -> do { <replaceable>ss</replaceable>; return <replaceable>vs</replaceable> })
</programlisting>
-For full details of the way in which mdo is typechecked and desugared, see
-the paper <ulink url="http://citeseer.ist.psu.edu/erk02recursive.html">A recursive do for Haskell</ulink>.
-In particular, GHC implements the segmentation technique described in Section 3.2 of the paper.
+where <replaceable>vs</replaceable> is a tuple of the variables bound by <replaceable>ss</replaceable>.
+</para><para>
+The original <literal>rec</literal> typechecks exactly
+when the above desugared version would do so. For example, this means that
+the variables <replaceable>vs</replaceable> are all monomorphic in the statements
+following the <literal>rec</literal>, because they are bound by a lambda.
</para>
<para>
-If recursive bindings are required for a monad,
-then that monad must be declared an instance of the <literal>MonadFix</literal> class.
-The following instances of <literal>MonadFix</literal> are automatically provided: List, Maybe, IO.
-Furthermore, the Control.Monad.ST and Control.Monad.ST.Lazy modules provide the instances of the MonadFix class
-for Haskell's internal state monad (strict and lazy, respectively).
+The <literal>mfix</literal> function is defined in the <literal>MonadFix</literal>
+class, in <literal>Control.Monad.Fix</literal>, thus:
+<programlisting>
+class Monad m => MonadFix m where
+ mfix :: (a -> m a) -> m a
+</programlisting>
+</para>
+</listitem>
+</itemizedlist>
</para>
<para>
-Here are some important points in using the recursive-do notation:
+Here are some other important points in using the recursive-do notation:
<itemizedlist>
<listitem><para>
-The recursive version of the do-notation uses the keyword <literal>mdo</literal> (rather
-than <literal>do</literal>).
+It is enabled with the flag <literal>-XDoRec</literal>, which is in turn implied by
+<literal>-fglasgow-exts</literal>.
</para></listitem>
<listitem><para>
-It is enabled with the flag <literal>-XRecursiveDo</literal>, which is in turn implied by
-<literal>-fglasgow-exts</literal>.
+If recursive bindings are required for a monad,
+then that monad must be declared an instance of the <literal>MonadFix</literal> class.
</para></listitem>
<listitem><para>
-Unlike ordinary do-notation, but like <literal>let</literal> and <literal>where</literal> bindings,
-name shadowing is not allowed; that is, all the names bound in a single <literal>mdo</literal> must
-be distinct (Section 3.3 of the paper).
+The following instances of <literal>MonadFix</literal> are automatically provided: List, Maybe, IO.
+Furthermore, the Control.Monad.ST and Control.Monad.ST.Lazy modules provide the instances of the MonadFix class
+for Haskell's internal state monad (strict and lazy, respectively).
</para></listitem>
<listitem><para>
-Variables bound by a <literal>let</literal> statement in an <literal>mdo</literal>
-are monomorphic in the <literal>mdo</literal> (Section 3.1 of the paper). However
-GHC breaks the <literal>mdo</literal> into segments to enhance polymorphism,
-and improve termination (Section 3.2 of the paper).
+Like <literal>let</literal> and <literal>where</literal> bindings,
+name shadowing is not allowed within a <literal>rec</literal>;
+that is, all the names bound in a single <literal>rec</literal> must
+be distinct (Section 3.3 of the paper).
+</para></listitem>
+<listitem><para>
+It supports rebindable syntax (see <xref linkend="rebindable-syntax"/>).
</para></listitem>
</itemizedlist>
</para>
+</sect3>
-<para>
-The web page: <ulink url="http://www.cse.ogi.edu/PacSoft/projects/rmb/">http://www.cse.ogi.edu/PacSoft/projects/rmb/</ulink>
-contains up to date information on recursive monadic bindings.
-</para>
+<sect3 id="mdo-notation"> <title> Mdo-notation (deprecated) </title>
+<para> GHC used to support the flag <option>-XRecursiveDo</option>,
+which enabled the keyword <literal>mdo</literal>, precisely as described in
+<ulink url="http://sites.google.com/site/leventerkok/">A recursive do for Haskell</ulink>,
+but this is now deprecated. Instead of <literal>mdo { Q; e }</literal>, write
+<literal>do { rec Q; e }</literal>.
+</para>
<para>
Historical note: The old implementation of the mdo-notation (and most
of the existing documents) used the name
<literal>MonadRec</literal> for the class and the corresponding library.
This name is not supported by GHC.
</para>
+</sect3>
</sect2>
<para>Generalised list comprehensions are a further enhancement to the
- list comprehension syntatic sugar to allow operations such as sorting
+ list comprehension syntactic sugar to allow operations such as sorting
and grouping which are familiar from SQL. They are fully described in the
paper <ulink url="http://research.microsoft.com/~simonpj/papers/list-comp">
Comprehensive comprehensions: comprehensions with "order by" and "group by"</ulink>,
except that the syntax we use differs slightly from the paper.</para>
+<para>The extension is enabled with the flag <option>-XTransformListComp</option>.</para>
<para>Here is an example:
<programlisting>
employees = [ ("Simon", "MS", 80)
</programlisting>
This statement requires that <literal>f</literal> have the type <literal>
- forall a. [a] -> [a]</literal>. You can see an example of it's use in the
+ forall a. [a] -> [a]</literal>. You can see an example of its use in the
motivating example, as this form is used to apply <literal>take 5</literal>.
</listitem>
<para>This form of grouping is essentially the same as the one described above. However,
since no function to use for the grouping has been supplied it will fall back on the
<literal>groupWith</literal> function defined in
- <ulink url="../libraries/base/GHC-Exts.html"><literal>GHC.Exts</literal></ulink>. This
+ <ulink url="&libraryBaseLocation;/GHC-Exts.html"><literal>GHC.Exts</literal></ulink>. This
is the form of the group statement that we made use of in the opening example.</para>
</listitem>
<!-- ===================== REBINDABLE SYNTAX =================== -->
<sect2 id="rebindable-syntax">
-<title>Rebindable syntax</title>
-
- <para>GHC allows most kinds of built-in syntax to be rebound by
- the user, to facilitate replacing the <literal>Prelude</literal>
- with a home-grown version, for example.</para>
-
- <para>You may want to define your own numeric class
+<title>Rebindable syntax and the implicit Prelude import</title>
+
+ <para><indexterm><primary>-XNoImplicitPrelude
+ option</primary></indexterm> GHC normally imports
+ <filename>Prelude.hi</filename> files for you. If you'd
+ rather it didn't, then give it a
+ <option>-XNoImplicitPrelude</option> option. The idea is
+ that you can then import a Prelude of your own. (But don't
+ call it <literal>Prelude</literal>; the Haskell module
+ namespace is flat, and you must not conflict with any
+ Prelude module.)</para>
+
+ <para>Suppose you are importing a Prelude of your own
+ in order to define your own numeric class
hierarchy. It completely defeats that purpose if the
literal "1" means "<literal>Prelude.fromInteger
1</literal>", which is what the Haskell Report specifies.
- So the <option>-XNoImplicitPrelude</option> flag causes
+ So the <option>-XNoImplicitPrelude</option>
+ flag <emphasis>also</emphasis> causes
the following pieces of built-in syntax to refer to
<emphasis>whatever is in scope</emphasis>, not the Prelude
versions:
-
<itemizedlist>
<listitem>
<para>An integer literal <literal>368</literal> means
<title>Postfix operators</title>
<para>
-GHC allows a small extension to the syntax of left operator sections, which
-allows you to define postfix operators. The extension is this: the left section
+ The <option>-XPostfixOperators</option> flag enables a small
+extension to the syntax of left operator sections, which allows you to
+define postfix operators. The extension is this: the left section
<programlisting>
(e !)
</programlisting>
take only one argument, and that in turn allows you to write the function
postfix.
</para>
-<para>Since this extension goes beyond Haskell 98, it should really be enabled
-by a flag; but in fact it is enabled all the time. (No Haskell 98 programs
-change their behaviour, of course.)
-</para>
<para>The extension does not extend to the left-hand side of function
definitions; you must define such a function in prefix form.</para>
</sect2>
+<sect2 id="tuple-sections">
+<title>Tuple sections</title>
+
+<para>
+ The <option>-XTupleSections</option> flag enables Python-style partially applied
+ tuple constructors. For example, the following program
+<programlisting>
+ (, True)
+</programlisting>
+ is considered to be an alternative notation for the more unwieldy alternative
+<programlisting>
+ \x -> (x, True)
+</programlisting>
+You can omit any combination of arguments to the tuple, as in the following
+<programlisting>
+ (, "I", , , "Love", , 1337)
+</programlisting>
+which translates to
+<programlisting>
+ \a b c d -> (a, "I", b, c, "Love", d, 1337)
+</programlisting>
+</para>
+
+<para>
+ If you have <link linkend="unboxed-tuples">unboxed tuples</link> enabled, tuple sections
+ will also be available for them, like so
+<programlisting>
+ (# , True #)
+</programlisting>
+Because there is no unboxed unit tuple, the following expression
+<programlisting>
+ (# #)
+</programlisting>
+continues to stand for the unboxed singleton tuple data constructor.
+</para>
+
+</sect2>
+
<sect2 id="disambiguate-fields">
<title>Record field disambiguation</title>
<para>
data T = MkT { x :: Int }
ok1 (MkS { x = n }) = n+1 -- Unambiguous
-
ok2 n = MkT { x = n+1 } -- Unambiguous
bad1 k = k { x = 3 } -- Ambiguous
</para>
<para>
Haskell 98 regards all four as ambiguous, but with the
-<option>-fdisambiguate-record-fields</option> flag, GHC will accept
+<option>-XDisambiguateRecordFields</option> flag, GHC will accept
the former two. The rules are precisely the same as those for instance
declarations in Haskell 98, where the method names on the left-hand side
of the method bindings in an instance declaration refer unambiguously
This reduces the clutter of qualified names when you import two
records from different modules that use the same field name.
</para>
+<para>
+Some details:
+<itemizedlist>
+<listitem><para>
+Field disambiguation can be combined with punning (see <xref linkend="record-puns"/>). For exampe:
+<programlisting>
+module Foo where
+ import M
+ x=True
+ ok3 (MkS { x }) = x+1 -- Uses both disambiguation and punning
+</programlisting>
+</para></listitem>
+
+<listitem><para>
+With <option>-XDisambiguateRecordFields</option> you can use <emphasis>unqualifed</emphasis>
+field names even if the correponding selector is only in scope <emphasis>qualified</emphasis>
+For example, assuming the same module <literal>M</literal> as in our earlier example, this is legal:
+<programlisting>
+module Foo where
+ import qualified M -- Note qualified
+
+ ok4 (M.MkS { x = n }) = n+1 -- Unambiguous
+</programlisting>
+Since the constructore <literal>MkS</literal> is only in scope qualified, you must
+name it <literal>M.MkS</literal>, but the field <literal>x</literal> does not need
+to be qualified even though <literal>M.x</literal> is in scope but <literal>x</literal>
+is not. (In effect, it is qualified by the constructor.)
+</para></listitem>
+</itemizedlist>
+</para>
+
</sect2>
<!-- ===================== Record puns =================== -->
</title>
<para>
-Record puns are enabled by the flag <literal>-XRecordPuns</literal>.
+Record puns are enabled by the flag <literal>-XNamedFieldPuns</literal>.
</para>
<para>
</para>
<para>
-Note that puns and other patterns can be mixed in the same record:
-<programlisting>
-data C = C {a :: Int, b :: Int}
-f (C {a, b = 4}) = a
-</programlisting>
-and that puns can be used wherever record patterns occur (e.g. in
-<literal>let</literal> bindings or at the top-level).
-</para>
-
-<para>
+Note that:
+<itemizedlist>
+<listitem><para>
Record punning can also be used in an expression, writing, for example,
<programlisting>
let a = 1 in C {a}
<programlisting>
let a = 1 in C {a = a}
</programlisting>
-
-Note that this expansion is purely syntactic, so the record pun
+The expansion is purely syntactic, so the expanded right-hand side
expression refers to the nearest enclosing variable that is spelled the
same as the field name.
-</para>
+</para></listitem>
-</sect2>
+<listitem><para>
+Puns and other patterns can be mixed in the same record:
+<programlisting>
+data C = C {a :: Int, b :: Int}
+f (C {a, b = 4}) = a
+</programlisting>
+</para></listitem>
+
+<listitem><para>
+Puns can be used wherever record patterns occur (e.g. in
+<literal>let</literal> bindings or at the top-level).
+</para></listitem>
+
+<listitem><para>
+A pun on a qualified field name is expanded by stripping off the module qualifier.
+For example:
+<programlisting>
+f (C {M.a}) = a
+</programlisting>
+means
+<programlisting>
+f (M.C {M.a = a}) = a
+</programlisting>
+(This is useful if the field selector <literal>a</literal> for constructor <literal>M.C</literal>
+is only in scope in qualified form.)
+</para></listitem>
+</itemizedlist>
+</para>
+
+
+</sect2>
<!-- ===================== Record wildcards =================== -->
<para>
Record wildcards are enabled by the flag <literal>-XRecordWildCards</literal>.
+This flag implies <literal>-XDisambiguateRecordFields</literal>.
</para>
<para>
</para>
<para>
-Record wildcard syntax permits a (<literal>..</literal>) in a record
+Record wildcard syntax permits a "<literal>..</literal>" in a record
pattern, where each elided field <literal>f</literal> is replaced by the
pattern <literal>f = f</literal>. For example, the above pattern can be
written as
</para>
<para>
-Note that wildcards can be mixed with other patterns, including puns
+More details:
+<itemizedlist>
+<listitem><para>
+Wildcards can be mixed with other patterns, including puns
(<xref linkend="record-puns"/>); for example, in a pattern <literal>C {a
= 1, b, ..})</literal>. Additionally, record wildcards can be used
wherever record patterns occur, including in <literal>let</literal>
</programlisting>
defines <literal>b</literal>, <literal>c</literal>, and
<literal>d</literal>.
-</para>
+</para></listitem>
-<para>
+<listitem><para>
Record wildcards can also be used in expressions, writing, for example,
-
<programlisting>
let {a = 1; b = 2; c = 3; d = 4} in C {..}
</programlisting>
-
in place of
-
<programlisting>
let {a = 1; b = 2; c = 3; d = 4} in C {a=a, b=b, c=c, d=d}
</programlisting>
-
-Note that this expansion is purely syntactic, so the record wildcard
+The expansion is purely syntactic, so the record wildcard
expression refers to the nearest enclosing variables that are spelled
the same as the omitted field names.
+</para></listitem>
+
+<listitem><para>
+The "<literal>..</literal>" expands to the missing
+<emphasis>in-scope</emphasis> record fields, where "in scope"
+includes both unqualified and qualified-only.
+Any fields that are not in scope are not filled in. For example
+<programlisting>
+module M where
+ data R = R { a,b,c :: Int }
+module X where
+ import qualified M( R(a,b) )
+ f a b = R { .. }
+</programlisting>
+The <literal>{..}</literal> expands to <literal>{M.a=a,M.b=b}</literal>,
+omitting <literal>c</literal> since it is not in scope at all.
+</para></listitem>
+</itemizedlist>
</para>
</sect2>
For example, in a <literal>let</literal>, it applies in the right-hand
sides of other <literal>let</literal>-bindings and the body of the
<literal>let</literal>C. Or, in recursive <literal>do</literal>
-expressions (<xref linkend="mdo-notation"/>), the local fixity
+expressions (<xref linkend="recursive-do-notation"/>), the local fixity
declarations of a <literal>let</literal> statement scope over other
statements in the group, just as the bound name does.
</para>
</para>
</sect2>
+<sect2 id="package-imports">
+ <title>Package-qualified imports</title>
+
+ <para>With the <option>-XPackageImports</option> flag, GHC allows
+ import declarations to be qualified by the package name that the
+ module is intended to be imported from. For example:</para>
+
+<programlisting>
+import "network" Network.Socket
+</programlisting>
+
+ <para>would import the module <literal>Network.Socket</literal> from
+ the package <literal>network</literal> (any version). This may
+ be used to disambiguate an import when the same module is
+ available from multiple packages, or is present in both the
+ current package being built and an external package.</para>
+
+ <para>Note: you probably don't need to use this feature, it was
+ added mainly so that we can build backwards-compatible versions of
+ packages when APIs change. It can lead to fragile dependencies in
+ the common case: modules occasionally move from one package to
+ another, rendering any package-qualified imports broken.</para>
+</sect2>
+
+<sect2 id="syntax-stolen">
+<title>Summary of stolen syntax</title>
+
+ <para>Turning on an option that enables special syntax
+ <emphasis>might</emphasis> cause working Haskell 98 code to fail
+ to compile, perhaps because it uses a variable name which has
+ become a reserved word. This section lists the syntax that is
+ "stolen" by language extensions.
+ We use
+ notation and nonterminal names from the Haskell 98 lexical syntax
+ (see the Haskell 98 Report).
+ We only list syntax changes here that might affect
+ existing working programs (i.e. "stolen" syntax). Many of these
+ extensions will also enable new context-free syntax, but in all
+ cases programs written to use the new syntax would not be
+ compilable without the option enabled.</para>
+
+<para>There are two classes of special
+ syntax:
+
+ <itemizedlist>
+ <listitem>
+ <para>New reserved words and symbols: character sequences
+ which are no longer available for use as identifiers in the
+ program.</para>
+ </listitem>
+ <listitem>
+ <para>Other special syntax: sequences of characters that have
+ a different meaning when this particular option is turned
+ on.</para>
+ </listitem>
+ </itemizedlist>
+
+The following syntax is stolen:
+
+ <variablelist>
+ <varlistentry>
+ <term>
+ <literal>forall</literal>
+ <indexterm><primary><literal>forall</literal></primary></indexterm>
+ </term>
+ <listitem><para>
+ Stolen (in types) by: <option>-XExplicitForAll</option>, and hence by
+ <option>-XScopedTypeVariables</option>,
+ <option>-XLiberalTypeSynonyms</option>,
+ <option>-XRank2Types</option>,
+ <option>-XRankNTypes</option>,
+ <option>-XPolymorphicComponents</option>,
+ <option>-XExistentialQuantification</option>
+ </para></listitem>
+ </varlistentry>
+
+ <varlistentry>
+ <term>
+ <literal>mdo</literal>
+ <indexterm><primary><literal>mdo</literal></primary></indexterm>
+ </term>
+ <listitem><para>
+ Stolen by: <option>-XRecursiveDo</option>,
+ </para></listitem>
+ </varlistentry>
+
+ <varlistentry>
+ <term>
+ <literal>foreign</literal>
+ <indexterm><primary><literal>foreign</literal></primary></indexterm>
+ </term>
+ <listitem><para>
+ Stolen by: <option>-XForeignFunctionInterface</option>,
+ </para></listitem>
+ </varlistentry>
+
+ <varlistentry>
+ <term>
+ <literal>rec</literal>,
+ <literal>proc</literal>, <literal>-<</literal>,
+ <literal>>-</literal>, <literal>-<<</literal>,
+ <literal>>>-</literal>, and <literal>(|</literal>,
+ <literal>|)</literal> brackets
+ <indexterm><primary><literal>proc</literal></primary></indexterm>
+ </term>
+ <listitem><para>
+ Stolen by: <option>-XArrows</option>,
+ </para></listitem>
+ </varlistentry>
+
+ <varlistentry>
+ <term>
+ <literal>?<replaceable>varid</replaceable></literal>,
+ <literal>%<replaceable>varid</replaceable></literal>
+ <indexterm><primary>implicit parameters</primary></indexterm>
+ </term>
+ <listitem><para>
+ Stolen by: <option>-XImplicitParams</option>,
+ </para></listitem>
+ </varlistentry>
+
+ <varlistentry>
+ <term>
+ <literal>[|</literal>,
+ <literal>[e|</literal>, <literal>[p|</literal>,
+ <literal>[d|</literal>, <literal>[t|</literal>,
+ <literal>$(</literal>,
+ <literal>$<replaceable>varid</replaceable></literal>
+ <indexterm><primary>Template Haskell</primary></indexterm>
+ </term>
+ <listitem><para>
+ Stolen by: <option>-XTemplateHaskell</option>,
+ </para></listitem>
+ </varlistentry>
+
+ <varlistentry>
+ <term>
+ <literal>[:<replaceable>varid</replaceable>|</literal>
+ <indexterm><primary>quasi-quotation</primary></indexterm>
+ </term>
+ <listitem><para>
+ Stolen by: <option>-XQuasiQuotes</option>,
+ </para></listitem>
+ </varlistentry>
+
+ <varlistentry>
+ <term>
+ <replaceable>varid</replaceable>{<literal>#</literal>},
+ <replaceable>char</replaceable><literal>#</literal>,
+ <replaceable>string</replaceable><literal>#</literal>,
+ <replaceable>integer</replaceable><literal>#</literal>,
+ <replaceable>float</replaceable><literal>#</literal>,
+ <replaceable>float</replaceable><literal>##</literal>,
+ <literal>(#</literal>, <literal>#)</literal>,
+ </term>
+ <listitem><para>
+ Stolen by: <option>-XMagicHash</option>,
+ </para></listitem>
+ </varlistentry>
+ </variablelist>
+</para>
+</sect2>
</sect1>
<title>Liberalised type synonyms</title>
<para>
-Type synonyms are like macros at the type level, and
+Type synonyms are like macros at the type level, but Haskell 98 imposes many rules
+on individual synonym declarations.
+With the <option>-XLiberalTypeSynonyms</option> extension,
GHC does validity checking on types <emphasis>only after expanding type synonyms</emphasis>.
-That means that GHC can be very much more liberal about type synonyms than Haskell 98:
+That means that GHC can be very much more liberal about type synonyms than Haskell 98.
+
<itemizedlist>
<listitem> <para>You can write a <literal>forall</literal> (including overloading)
in a type synonym, thus:
</listitem>
<listitem><para>
-You can write an unboxed tuple in a type synonym:
+If you also use <option>-XUnboxedTuples</option>,
+you can write an unboxed tuple in a type synonym:
<programlisting>
type Pr = (# Int, Int #)
display (inc (inc counterB)) -- prints "##"
</programlisting>
-At the moment, record update syntax is only supported for Haskell 98 data types,
-so the following function does <emphasis>not</emphasis> work:
-
+Record update syntax is supported for existentials (and GADTs):
<programlisting>
--- This is invalid; use explicit NewCounter instead for now
setTag :: Counter a -> a -> Counter a
setTag obj t = obj{ tag = t }
</programlisting>
+The rule for record update is this: <emphasis>
+the types of the updated fields may
+mention only the universally-quantified type variables
+of the data constructor. For GADTs, the field may mention only types
+that appear as a simple type-variable argument in the constructor's result
+type</emphasis>. For example:
+<programlisting>
+data T a b where { T1 { f1::a, f2::b, f3::(b,c) } :: T a b } -- c is existential
+upd1 t x = t { f1=x } -- OK: upd1 :: T a b -> a' -> T a' b
+upd2 t x = t { f3=x } -- BAD (f3's type mentions c, which is
+ -- existentially quantified)
+data G a b where { G1 { g1::a, g2::c } :: G a [c] }
+upd3 g x = g { g1=x } -- OK: upd3 :: G a b -> c -> G c b
+upd4 g x = g { g2=x } -- BAD (f2's type mentions c, which is not a simple
+ -- type-variable argument in G1's result type)
+</programlisting>
</para>
</sect3>
</para></listitem>
<listitem><para>
+As with other type signatures, you can give a single signature for several data constructors.
+In this example we give a single signature for <literal>T1</literal> and <literal>T2</literal>:
+<programlisting>
+ data T a where
+ T1,T2 :: a -> T a
+ T3 :: T a
+</programlisting>
+</para></listitem>
+
+<listitem><para>
The type signature of
each constructor is independent, and is implicitly universally quantified as usual.
-Different constructors may have different universally-quantified type variables
-and different type-class constraints.
-For example, this is fine:
+In particular, the type variable(s) in the "<literal>data T a where</literal>" header
+have no scope, and different constructors may have different universally-quantified type variables:
+<programlisting>
+ data T a where -- The 'a' has no scope
+ T1,T2 :: b -> T b -- Means forall b. b -> T b
+ T3 :: T a -- Means forall a. T a
+</programlisting>
+</para></listitem>
+
+<listitem><para>
+A constructor signature may mention type class constraints, which can differ for
+different constructors. For example, this is fine:
<programlisting>
data T a where
- T1 :: Eq b => b -> T b
+ T1 :: Eq b => b -> b -> T b
T2 :: (Show c, Ix c) => c -> [c] -> T c
</programlisting>
+When patten matching, these constraints are made available to discharge constraints
+in the body of the match. For example:
+<programlisting>
+ f :: T a -> String
+ f (T1 x y) | x==y = "yes"
+ | otherwise = "no"
+ f (T2 a b) = show a
+</programlisting>
+Note that <literal>f</literal> is not overloaded; the <literal>Eq</literal> constraint arising
+from the use of <literal>==</literal> is discharged by the pattern match on <literal>T1</literal>
+and similarly the <literal>Show</literal> constraint arising from the use of <literal>show</literal>.
</para></listitem>
<listitem><para>
</programlisting>
or even a mixture of the two:
<programlisting>
- data Foo a :: (* -> *) -> * where ...
+ data Bar a :: (* -> *) -> * where ...
</programlisting>
The type variables (if given) may be explicitly kinded, so we could also write the header for <literal>Foo</literal>
like this:
<programlisting>
- data Foo a (b :: * -> *) where ...
+ data Bar a (b :: * -> *) where ...
</programlisting>
</para></listitem>
</para></listitem>
<listitem><para>
+The type signature may have quantified type variables that do not appear
+in the result type:
+<programlisting>
+ data Foo where
+ MkFoo :: a -> (a->Bool) -> Foo
+ Nil :: Foo
+</programlisting>
+Here the type variable <literal>a</literal> does not appear in the result type
+of either constructor.
+Although it is universally quantified in the type of the constructor, such
+a type variable is often called "existential".
+Indeed, the above declaration declares precisely the same type as
+the <literal>data Foo</literal> in <xref linkend="existential-quantification"/>.
+</para><para>
+The type may contain a class context too, of course:
+<programlisting>
+ data Showable where
+ MkShowable :: Show a => a -> Showable
+</programlisting>
+</para></listitem>
+
+<listitem><para>
You can use record syntax on a GADT-style data type declaration:
<programlisting>
data Person where
- Adult { name :: String, children :: [Person] } :: Person
- Child { name :: String } :: Person
+ Adult :: { name :: String, children :: [Person] } -> Person
+ Child :: Show a => { name :: !String, funny :: a } -> Person
</programlisting>
As usual, for every constructor that has a field <literal>f</literal>, the type of
field <literal>f</literal> must be the same (modulo alpha conversion).
-</para>
-<para>
-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 example
-<programlisting>
- aPerson = Adult { name = "Fred", children = [] }
+The <literal>Child</literal> constructor above shows that the signature
+may have a context, existentially-quantified variables, and strictness annotations,
+just as in the non-record case. (NB: the "type" that follows the double-colon
+is not really a type, because of the record syntax and strictness annotations.
+A "type" of this form can appear only in a constructor signature.)
+</para></listitem>
- shortName :: Person -> Bool
- hasChildren (Adult { children = kids }) = not (null kids)
- hasChildren (Child {}) = False
-</programlisting>
+<listitem><para>
+Record updates are allowed with GADT-style declarations,
+only fields that have the following property: the type of the field
+mentions no existential type variables.
</para></listitem>
<listitem><para>
but for a GADT the arguments to the type constructor can be arbitrary monotypes.
For example, in the <literal>Term</literal> data
type above, the type of each constructor must end with <literal>Term ty</literal>, but
-the <literal>ty</literal> may not be a type variable (e.g. the <literal>Lit</literal>
+the <literal>ty</literal> need not be a type variable (e.g. the <literal>Lit</literal>
constructor).
</para></listitem>
<listitem><para>
+It is permitted to declare an ordinary algebraic data type using GADT-style syntax.
+What makes a GADT into a GADT is not the syntax, but rather the presence of data constructors
+whose result type is not just <literal>T a b</literal>.
+</para></listitem>
+
+<listitem><para>
You cannot use a <literal>deriving</literal> clause for a GADT; only for
an ordinary data type.
</para></listitem>
</programlisting>
</para></listitem>
+<listitem><para>
+When pattern-matching against data constructors drawn from a GADT,
+for example in a <literal>case</literal> expression, the following rules apply:
+<itemizedlist>
+<listitem><para>The type of the scrutinee must be rigid.</para></listitem>
+<listitem><para>The type of the entire <literal>case</literal> expression must be rigid.</para></listitem>
+<listitem><para>The type of any free variable mentioned in any of
+the <literal>case</literal> alternatives must be rigid.</para></listitem>
+</itemizedlist>
+A type is "rigid" if it is completely known to the compiler at its binding site. The easiest
+way to ensure that a variable a rigid type is to give it a type signature.
+For more precise details see <ulink url="http://research.microsoft.com/%7Esimonpj/papers/gadt">
+Simple unification-based type inference for GADTs
+</ulink>. The criteria implemented by GHC are given in the Appendix.
+
+</para></listitem>
+
</itemizedlist>
</para>
</programlisting>
The syntax is identical to that of an ordinary instance declaration apart from (a) the keyword
<literal>deriving</literal>, and (b) the absence of the <literal>where</literal> part.
-You must supply a context (in the example the context is <literal>(Eq a)</literal>),
+Note the following points:
+<itemizedlist>
+<listitem><para>
+You must supply an explicit context (in the example the context is <literal>(Eq a)</literal>),
exactly as you would in an ordinary instance declaration.
-(In contrast the context is inferred in a <literal>deriving</literal> clause
-attached to a data type declaration.) These <literal>deriving instance</literal>
-rules obey the same rules concerning form and termination as ordinary instance declarations,
-controlled by the same flags; see <xref linkend="instance-decls"/>. </para>
+(In contrast, in a <literal>deriving</literal> clause
+attached to a data type declaration, the context is inferred.)
+</para></listitem>
+
+<listitem><para>
+A <literal>deriving instance</literal> declaration
+must obey the same rules concerning form and termination as ordinary instance declarations,
+controlled by the same flags; see <xref linkend="instance-decls"/>.
+</para></listitem>
+
+<listitem><para>
+Unlike a <literal>deriving</literal>
+declaration attached to a <literal>data</literal> declaration, the instance can be more specific
+than the data type (assuming you also use
+<literal>-XFlexibleInstances</literal>, <xref linkend="instance-rules"/>). Consider
+for example
+<programlisting>
+ data Foo a = Bar a | Baz String
+ deriving instance Eq a => Eq (Foo [a])
+ deriving instance Eq a => Eq (Foo (Maybe a))
+</programlisting>
+This will generate a derived instance for <literal>(Foo [a])</literal> and <literal>(Foo (Maybe a))</literal>,
+but other types such as <literal>(Foo (Int,Bool))</literal> will not be an instance of <literal>Eq</literal>.
+</para></listitem>
+
+<listitem><para>
+Unlike a <literal>deriving</literal>
+declaration attached to a <literal>data</literal> declaration,
+GHC does not restrict the form of the data type. Instead, GHC simply generates the appropriate
+boilerplate code for the specified class, and typechecks it. If there is a type error, it is
+your problem. (GHC will show you the offending code if it has a type error.)
+The merit of this is that you can derive instances for GADTs and other exotic
+data types, providing only that the boilerplate code does indeed typecheck. For example:
+<programlisting>
+ data T a where
+ T1 :: T Int
+ T2 :: T Bool
+
+ deriving instance Show (T a)
+</programlisting>
+In this example, you cannot say <literal>... deriving( Show )</literal> on the
+data type declaration for <literal>T</literal>,
+because <literal>T</literal> is a GADT, but you <emphasis>can</emphasis> generate
+the instance declaration using stand-alone deriving.
+</para>
+</listitem>
+
+<listitem>
<para>The stand-alone syntax is generalised for newtypes in exactly the same
way that ordinary <literal>deriving</literal> clauses are generalised (<xref linkend="newtype-deriving"/>).
For example:
</programlisting>
GHC always treats the <emphasis>last</emphasis> parameter of the instance
(<literal>Foo</literal> in this example) as the type whose instance is being derived.
-</para>
+</para></listitem>
+</itemizedlist></para>
</sect2>
<sect2 id="deriving-typeable">
-<title>Deriving clause for classes <literal>Typeable</literal> and <literal>Data</literal></title>
+<title>Deriving clause for extra classes (<literal>Typeable</literal>, <literal>Data</literal>, etc)</title>
<para>
Haskell 98 allows the programmer to add "<literal>deriving( Eq, Ord )</literal>" to a data type
<literal>Enum</literal>, <literal>Ix</literal>, <literal>Bounded</literal>, <literal>Read</literal>, and <literal>Show</literal>.
</para>
<para>
-GHC extends this list with two more classes that may be automatically derived
-(provided the <option>-XDeriveDataTypeable</option> flag is specified):
-<literal>Typeable</literal>, and <literal>Data</literal>. These classes are defined in the library
-modules <literal>Data.Typeable</literal> and <literal>Data.Generics</literal> respectively, and the
-appropriate class must be in scope before it can be mentioned in the <literal>deriving</literal> clause.
+GHC extends this list with several more classes that may be automatically derived:
+<itemizedlist>
+<listitem><para> With <option>-XDeriveDataTypeable</option>, you can derive instances of the classes
+<literal>Typeable</literal>, and <literal>Data</literal>, defined in the library
+modules <literal>Data.Typeable</literal> and <literal>Data.Generics</literal> respectively.
</para>
<para>An instance of <literal>Typeable</literal> can only be derived if the
data type has seven or fewer type parameters, all of kind <literal>*</literal>.
class, whose kind suits that of the data type constructor, and
then writing the data type instance by hand.
</para>
+</listitem>
+
+<listitem><para> With <option>-XDeriveFunctor</option>, you can derive instances of
+the class <literal>Functor</literal>,
+defined in <literal>GHC.Base</literal>.
+</para></listitem>
+
+<listitem><para> With <option>-XDeriveFoldable</option>, you can derive instances of
+the class <literal>Foldable</literal>,
+defined in <literal>Data.Foldable</literal>.
+</para></listitem>
+
+<listitem><para> With <option>-XDeriveTraversable</option>, you can derive instances of
+the class <literal>Traversable</literal>,
+defined in <literal>Data.Traversable</literal>.
+</para></listitem>
+</itemizedlist>
+In each case the appropriate class must be in scope before it
+can be mentioned in the <literal>deriving</literal> clause.
+</para>
</sect2>
<sect2 id="newtype-deriving">
<sect3>
<title>Multi-parameter type classes</title>
<para>
-Multi-parameter type classes are permitted. For example:
+Multi-parameter type classes are permitted, with flag <option>-XMultiParamTypeClasses</option>.
+For example:
<programlisting>
</para>
</sect3>
-<sect3>
+<sect3 id="superclass-rules">
<title>The superclasses of a class declaration</title>
<para>
-There are no restrictions on the context in a class declaration
-(which introduces superclasses), except that the class hierarchy must
-be acyclic. So these class declarations are OK:
+In Haskell 98 the context of a class declaration (which introduces superclasses)
+must be simple; that is, each predicate must consist of a class applied to
+type variables. The flag <option>-XFlexibleContexts</option>
+(<xref linkend="flexible-contexts"/>)
+lifts this restriction,
+so that the only restriction on the context in a class declaration is
+that the class hierarchy must be acyclic. So these class declarations are OK:
<programlisting>
<sect3><title>Rules for functional dependencies </title>
<para>
In a class declaration, all of the class type variables must be reachable (in the sense
-mentioned in <xref linkend="type-restrictions"/>)
+mentioned in <xref linkend="flexible-contexts"/>)
from the free variables of each method type.
For example:
<sect2 id="instance-decls">
<title>Instance declarations</title>
-<sect3 id="instance-rules">
-<title>Relaxed rules for instance declarations</title>
-
<para>An instance declaration has the form
<screen>
instance ( <replaceable>assertion</replaceable><subscript>1</subscript>, ..., <replaceable>assertion</replaceable><subscript>n</subscript>) => <replaceable>class</replaceable> <replaceable>type</replaceable><subscript>1</subscript> ... <replaceable>type</replaceable><subscript>m</subscript> where ...
"<literal>=></literal>" is the <emphasis>head</emphasis> of the instance declaration.
</para>
+<sect3 id="flexible-instance-head">
+<title>Relaxed rules for the instance head</title>
+
<para>
In Haskell 98 the head of an instance declaration
must be of the form <literal>C (T a1 ... an)</literal>, where
-<literal>C</literal> is the class, <literal>T</literal> is a type constructor,
+<literal>C</literal> is the class, <literal>T</literal> is a data type constructor,
and the <literal>a1 ... an</literal> are distinct type variables.
-Furthermore, the assertions in the context of the instance declaration
+GHC relaxes these rules in two ways.
+<itemizedlist>
+<listitem>
+<para>
+The <option>-XFlexibleInstances</option> flag allows the head of the instance
+declaration to mention arbitrary nested types.
+For example, this becomes a legal instance declaration
+<programlisting>
+ instance C (Maybe Int) where ...
+</programlisting>
+See also the <link linkend="instance-overlap">rules on overlap</link>.
+</para></listitem>
+<listitem><para>
+With the <option>-XTypeSynonymInstances</option> flag, instance heads may use type
+synonyms. As always, using a type synonym is just shorthand for
+writing the RHS of the type synonym definition. For example:
+
+
+<programlisting>
+ type Point = (Int,Int)
+ instance C Point where ...
+ instance C [Point] where ...
+</programlisting>
+
+
+is legal. However, if you added
+
+
+<programlisting>
+ instance C (Int,Int) where ...
+</programlisting>
+
+
+as well, then the compiler will complain about the overlapping
+(actually, identical) instance declarations. As always, type synonyms
+must be fully applied. You cannot, for example, write:
+
+<programlisting>
+ type P a = [[a]]
+ instance Monad P where ...
+</programlisting>
+
+</para></listitem>
+</itemizedlist>
+</para>
+</sect3>
+
+<sect3 id="instance-rules">
+<title>Relaxed rules for instance contexts</title>
+
+<para>In Haskell 98, the assertions in the context of the instance declaration
must be of the form <literal>C a</literal> where <literal>a</literal>
is a type variable that occurs in the head.
</para>
+
<para>
-The <option>-XFlexibleInstances</option> flag loosens these restrictions
-considerably. Firstly, multi-parameter type classes are permitted. Secondly,
-the context and head of the instance declaration can each consist of arbitrary
+The <option>-XFlexibleContexts</option> flag relaxes this rule, as well
+as the corresponding rule for type signatures (see <xref linkend="flexible-contexts"/>).
+With this flag the context of the instance declaration can each consist of arbitrary
(well-kinded) assertions <literal>(C t1 ... tn)</literal> subject only to the
following rules:
<orderedlist>
These restrictions ensure that context reduction terminates: each reduction
step makes the problem smaller by at least one
constructor. Both the Paterson Conditions and the Coverage Condition are lifted
-if you give the <option>-fallow-undecidable-instances</option>
+if you give the <option>-XUndecidableInstances</option>
flag (<xref linkend="undecidable-instances"/>).
You can find lots of background material about the reason for these
restrictions in the paper <ulink
<emphasis>check</emphasis> that <literal>f</literal> has the specified type.
Suppose instead we do not give a type signature, asking GHC to <emphasis>infer</emphasis>
it instead. In this case, GHC will refrain from
-simplifying the constraint <literal>C Int [Int]</literal> (for the same reason
+simplifying the constraint <literal>C Int [b]</literal> (for the same reason
as before) but, rather than rejecting the program, it will infer the type
<programlisting>
- f :: C Int b => [b] -> [b]
+ f :: C Int [b] => [b] -> [b]
</programlisting>
That postpones the question of which instance to pick to the
call site for <literal>f</literal>
by which time more is known about the type <literal>b</literal>.
+You can write this type signature yourself if you use the
+<link linkend="flexible-contexts"><option>-XFlexibleContexts</option></link>
+flag.
+</para>
+<para>
+Exactly the same situation can arise in instance declarations themselves. Suppose we have
+<programlisting>
+ class Foo a where
+ f :: a -> a
+ instance Foo [b] where
+ f x = ...
+</programlisting>
+and, as before, the constraint <literal>C Int [b]</literal> arises from <literal>f</literal>'s
+right hand side. GHC will reject the instance, complaining as before that it does not know how to resolve
+the constraint <literal>C Int [b]</literal>, because it matches more than one instance
+declaration. The solution is to postpone the choice by adding the constraint to the context
+of the instance declaration, thus:
+<programlisting>
+ instance C Int [b] => Foo [b] where
+ f x = ...
+</programlisting>
+(You need <link linkend="instance-rules"><option>-XFlexibleInstances</option></link> to do this.)
+</para>
+<para>
+Warning: overlapping instances must be used with care. They
+can give rise to incoherence (ie different instance choices are made
+in different parts of the program) even without <option>-XIncoherentInstances</option>. Consider:
+<programlisting>
+{-# LANGUAGE OverlappingInstances #-}
+module Help where
+
+ class MyShow a where
+ myshow :: a -> String
+
+ instance MyShow a => MyShow [a] where
+ myshow xs = concatMap myshow xs
+
+ showHelp :: MyShow a => [a] -> String
+ showHelp xs = myshow xs
+
+{-# LANGUAGE FlexibleInstances, OverlappingInstances #-}
+module Main where
+ import Help
+
+ data T = MkT
+
+ instance MyShow T where
+ myshow x = "Used generic instance"
+
+ instance MyShow [T] where
+ myshow xs = "Used more specific instance"
+
+ main = do { print (myshow [MkT]); print (showHelp [MkT]) }
+</programlisting>
+In function <literal>showHelp</literal> GHC sees no overlapping
+instances, and so uses the <literal>MyShow [a]</literal> instance
+without complaint. In the call to <literal>myshow</literal> in <literal>main</literal>,
+GHC resolves the <literal>MyShow [T]</literal> constraint using the overlapping
+instance declaration in module <literal>Main</literal>. As a result,
+the program prints
+<programlisting>
+ "Used more specific instance"
+ "Used generic instance"
+</programlisting>
+(An alternative possible behaviour, not currently implemented,
+would be to reject module <literal>Help</literal>
+on the grounds that a later instance declaration might overlap the local one.)
</para>
<para>
The willingness to be overlapped or incoherent is a property of
</para>
</sect3>
-<sect3>
-<title>Type synonyms in the instance head</title>
-
-<para>
-<emphasis>Unlike Haskell 98, instance heads may use type
-synonyms</emphasis>. (The instance "head" is the bit after the "=>" in an instance decl.)
-As always, using a type synonym is just shorthand for
-writing the RHS of the type synonym definition. For example:
-
-
-<programlisting>
- type Point = (Int,Int)
- instance C Point where ...
- instance C [Point] where ...
-</programlisting>
-
-
-is legal. However, if you added
-
-
-<programlisting>
- instance C (Int,Int) where ...
-</programlisting>
-
-
-as well, then the compiler will complain about the overlapping
-(actually, identical) instance declarations. As always, type synonyms
-must be fully applied. You cannot, for example, write:
-
-
-<programlisting>
- type P a = [[a]]
- instance Monad P where ...
-</programlisting>
-
-
-This design decision is independent of all the others, and easily
-reversed, but it makes sense to me.
-
-</para>
-</sect3>
</sect2>
greet "hello" = "world"
greet other = other
-main = do
- print $ greet "hello"
- print $ greet "fool"
+main = do
+ print $ greet "hello"
+ print $ greet "fool"
+</programlisting>
+</para>
+<para>
+Note that deriving <literal>Eq</literal> is necessary for the pattern matching
+to work since it gets translated into an equality comparison.
+</para>
+</sect2>
+
+</sect1>
+
+<sect1 id="type-families">
+<title>Type families</title>
+
+<para>
+ <firstterm>Indexed type families</firstterm> are a new GHC extension to
+ facilitate type-level
+ programming. Type families are a generalisation of <firstterm>associated
+ data types</firstterm>
+ (“<ulink url="http://www.cse.unsw.edu.au/~chak/papers/CKPM05.html">Associated
+ Types with Class</ulink>”, M. Chakravarty, G. Keller, S. Peyton Jones,
+ and S. Marlow. In Proceedings of “The 32nd Annual ACM SIGPLAN-SIGACT
+ Symposium on Principles of Programming Languages (POPL'05)”, pages
+ 1-13, ACM Press, 2005) and <firstterm>associated type synonyms</firstterm>
+ (“<ulink url="http://www.cse.unsw.edu.au/~chak/papers/CKP05.html">Type
+ Associated Type Synonyms</ulink>”. M. Chakravarty, G. Keller, and
+ S. Peyton Jones.
+ In Proceedings of “The Tenth ACM SIGPLAN International Conference on
+ Functional Programming”, ACM Press, pages 241-253, 2005). Type families
+ themselves are described in the paper “<ulink
+ url="http://www.cse.unsw.edu.au/~chak/papers/SPCS08.html">Type
+ Checking with Open Type Functions</ulink>”, T. Schrijvers,
+ S. Peyton-Jones,
+ M. Chakravarty, and M. Sulzmann, in Proceedings of “ICFP 2008: The
+ 13th ACM SIGPLAN International Conference on Functional
+ Programming”, ACM Press, pages 51-62, 2008. Type families
+ essentially provide type-indexed data types and named functions on types,
+ which are useful for generic programming and highly parameterised library
+ interfaces as well as interfaces with enhanced static information, much like
+ dependent types. They might also be regarded as an alternative to functional
+ dependencies, but provide a more functional style of type-level programming
+ than the relational style of functional dependencies.
+</para>
+<para>
+ Indexed type families, or type families for short, are type constructors that
+ represent sets of types. Set members are denoted by supplying the type family
+ constructor with type parameters, which are called <firstterm>type
+ indices</firstterm>. The
+ difference between vanilla parametrised type constructors and family
+ constructors is much like between parametrically polymorphic functions and
+ (ad-hoc polymorphic) methods of type classes. Parametric polymorphic functions
+ behave the same at all type instances, whereas class methods can change their
+ behaviour in dependence on the class type parameters. Similarly, vanilla type
+ constructors imply the same data representation for all type instances, but
+ family constructors can have varying representation types for varying type
+ indices.
+</para>
+<para>
+ Indexed type families come in two flavours: <firstterm>data
+ families</firstterm> and <firstterm>type synonym
+ families</firstterm>. They are the indexed family variants of algebraic
+ data types and type synonyms, respectively. The instances of data families
+ can be data types and newtypes.
+</para>
+<para>
+ Type families are enabled by the flag <option>-XTypeFamilies</option>.
+ Additional information on the use of type families in GHC is available on
+ <ulink url="http://www.haskell.org/haskellwiki/GHC/Indexed_types">the
+ Haskell wiki page on type families</ulink>.
+</para>
+
+<sect2 id="data-families">
+ <title>Data families</title>
+
+ <para>
+ Data families appear in two flavours: (1) they can be defined on the
+ toplevel
+ or (2) they can appear inside type classes (in which case they are known as
+ associated types). The former is the more general variant, as it lacks the
+ requirement for the type-indexes to coincide with the class
+ parameters. However, the latter can lead to more clearly structured code and
+ compiler warnings if some type instances were - possibly accidentally -
+ omitted. In the following, we always discuss the general toplevel form first
+ and then cover the additional constraints placed on associated types.
+ </para>
+
+ <sect3 id="data-family-declarations">
+ <title>Data family declarations</title>
+
+ <para>
+ Indexed data families are introduced by a signature, such as
+<programlisting>
+data family GMap k :: * -> *
+</programlisting>
+ The special <literal>family</literal> distinguishes family from standard
+ data declarations. The result kind annotation is optional and, as
+ usual, defaults to <literal>*</literal> if omitted. An example is
+<programlisting>
+data family Array e
+</programlisting>
+ Named arguments can also be given explicit kind signatures if needed.
+ Just as with
+ [http://www.haskell.org/ghc/docs/latest/html/users_guide/gadt.html GADT
+ declarations] named arguments are entirely optional, so that we can
+ declare <literal>Array</literal> alternatively with
+<programlisting>
+data family Array :: * -> *
+</programlisting>
+ </para>
+
+ <sect4 id="assoc-data-family-decl">
+ <title>Associated data family declarations</title>
+ <para>
+ When a data family is declared as part of a type class, we drop
+ the <literal>family</literal> special. The <literal>GMap</literal>
+ declaration takes the following form
+<programlisting>
+class GMapKey k where
+ data GMap k :: * -> *
+ ...
+</programlisting>
+ In contrast to toplevel declarations, named arguments must be used for
+ all type parameters that are to be used as type-indexes. Moreover,
+ the argument names must be class parameters. Each class parameter may
+ only be used at most once per associated type, but some may be omitted
+ and they may be in an order other than in the class head. Hence, the
+ following contrived example is admissible:
+<programlisting>
+ class C a b c where
+ data T c a :: *
+</programlisting>
+ </para>
+ </sect4>
+ </sect3>
+
+ <sect3 id="data-instance-declarations">
+ <title>Data instance declarations</title>
+
+ <para>
+ Instance declarations of data and newtype families are very similar to
+ standard data and newtype declarations. The only two differences are
+ that the keyword <literal>data</literal> or <literal>newtype</literal>
+ is followed by <literal>instance</literal> and that some or all of the
+ type arguments can be non-variable types, but may not contain forall
+ types or type synonym families. However, data families are generally
+ allowed in type parameters, and type synonyms are allowed as long as
+ they are fully applied and expand to a type that is itself admissible -
+ exactly as this is required for occurrences of type synonyms in class
+ instance parameters. For example, the <literal>Either</literal>
+ instance for <literal>GMap</literal> is
+<programlisting>
+data instance GMap (Either a b) v = GMapEither (GMap a v) (GMap b v)
+</programlisting>
+ In this example, the declaration has only one variant. In general, it
+ can be any number.
+ </para>
+ <para>
+ Data and newtype instance declarations are only permitted when an
+ appropriate family declaration is in scope - just as a class instance declaratoin
+ requires the class declaration to be visible. Moreover, each instance
+ declaration has to conform to the kind determined by its family
+ declaration. This implies that the number of parameters of an instance
+ declaration matches the arity determined by the kind of the family.
+ </para>
+ <para>
+ A data family instance declaration can use the full exprssiveness of
+ ordinary <literal>data</literal> or <literal>newtype</literal> declarations:
+ <itemizedlist>
+ <listitem><para> Although, a data family is <emphasis>introduced</emphasis> with
+ the keyword "<literal>data</literal>", a data family <emphasis>instance</emphasis> can
+ use either <literal>data</literal> or <literal>newtype</literal>. For example:
+<programlisting>
+data family T a
+data instance T Int = T1 Int | T2 Bool
+newtype instance T Char = TC Bool
+</programlisting>
+ </para></listitem>
+ <listitem><para> A <literal>data instance</literal> can use GADT syntax for the data constructors,
+ and indeed can define a GADT. For example:
+<programlisting>
+data family G a b
+data instance G [a] b where
+ G1 :: c -> G [Int] b
+ G2 :: G [a] Bool
+</programlisting>
+ </para></listitem>
+ <listitem><para> You can use a <literal>deriving</literal> clause on a
+ <literal>data instance</literal> or <literal>newtype instance</literal>
+ declaration.
+ </para></listitem>
+ </itemizedlist>
+ </para>
+
+ <para>
+ Even if type families are defined as toplevel declarations, functions
+ that perform different computations for different family instances may still
+ need to be defined as methods of type classes. In particular, the
+ following is not possible:
+<programlisting>
+data family T a
+data instance T Int = A
+data instance T Char = B
+foo :: T a -> Int
+foo A = 1 -- WRONG: These two equations together...
+foo B = 2 -- ...will produce a type error.
+</programlisting>
+Instead, you would have to write <literal>foo</literal> as a class operation, thus:
+<programlisting>
+class C a where
+ foo :: T a -> Int
+instance Foo Int where
+ foo A = 1
+instance Foo Char where
+ foo B = 2
+</programlisting>
+ (Given the functionality provided by GADTs (Generalised Algebraic Data
+ Types), it might seem as if a definition, such as the above, should be
+ feasible. However, type families are - in contrast to GADTs - are
+ <emphasis>open;</emphasis> i.e., new instances can always be added,
+ possibly in other
+ modules. Supporting pattern matching across different data instances
+ would require a form of extensible case construct.)
+ </para>
+
+ <sect4 id="assoc-data-inst">
+ <title>Associated data instances</title>
+ <para>
+ When an associated data family instance is declared within a type
+ class instance, we drop the <literal>instance</literal> keyword in the
+ family instance. So, the <literal>Either</literal> instance
+ for <literal>GMap</literal> becomes:
+<programlisting>
+instance (GMapKey a, GMapKey b) => GMapKey (Either a b) where
+ data GMap (Either a b) v = GMapEither (GMap a v) (GMap b v)
+ ...
+</programlisting>
+ The most important point about associated family instances is that the
+ type indexes corresponding to class parameters must be identical to
+ the type given in the instance head; here this is the first argument
+ of <literal>GMap</literal>, namely <literal>Either a b</literal>,
+ which coincides with the only class parameter. Any parameters to the
+ family constructor that do not correspond to class parameters, need to
+ be variables in every instance; here this is the
+ variable <literal>v</literal>.
+ </para>
+ <para>
+ Instances for an associated family can only appear as part of
+ instances declarations of the class in which the family was declared -
+ just as with the equations of the methods of a class. Also in
+ correspondence to how methods are handled, declarations of associated
+ types can be omitted in class instances. If an associated family
+ instance is omitted, the corresponding instance type is not inhabited;
+ i.e., only diverging expressions, such
+ as <literal>undefined</literal>, can assume the type.
+ </para>
+ </sect4>
+
+ <sect4 id="scoping-class-params">
+ <title>Scoping of class parameters</title>
+ <para>
+ In the case of multi-parameter type classes, the visibility of class
+ parameters in the right-hand side of associated family instances
+ depends <emphasis>solely</emphasis> on the parameters of the data
+ family. As an example, consider the simple class declaration
+<programlisting>
+class C a b where
+ data T a
+</programlisting>
+ Only one of the two class parameters is a parameter to the data
+ family. Hence, the following instance declaration is invalid:
+<programlisting>
+instance C [c] d where
+ data T [c] = MkT (c, d) -- WRONG!! 'd' is not in scope
+</programlisting>
+ Here, the right-hand side of the data instance mentions the type
+ variable <literal>d</literal> that does not occur in its left-hand
+ side. We cannot admit such data instances as they would compromise
+ type safety.
+ </para>
+ </sect4>
+
+ <sect4 id="family-class-inst">
+ <title>Type class instances of family instances</title>
+ <para>
+ Type class instances of instances of data families can be defined as
+ usual, and in particular data instance declarations can
+ have <literal>deriving</literal> clauses. For example, we can write
+<programlisting>
+data GMap () v = GMapUnit (Maybe v)
+ deriving Show
+</programlisting>
+ which implicitly defines an instance of the form
+<programlisting>
+instance Show v => Show (GMap () v) where ...
+</programlisting>
+ </para>
+ <para>
+ Note that class instances are always for
+ particular <emphasis>instances</emphasis> of a data family and never
+ for an entire family as a whole. This is for essentially the same
+ reasons that we cannot define a toplevel function that performs
+ pattern matching on the data constructors
+ of <emphasis>different</emphasis> instances of a single type family.
+ It would require a form of extensible case construct.
+ </para>
+ </sect4>
+
+ <sect4 id="data-family-overlap">
+ <title>Overlap of data instances</title>
+ <para>
+ The instance declarations of a data family used in a single program
+ may not overlap at all, independent of whether they are associated or
+ not. In contrast to type class instances, this is not only a matter
+ of consistency, but one of type safety.
+ </para>
+ </sect4>
+
+ </sect3>
+
+ <sect3 id="data-family-import-export">
+ <title>Import and export</title>
+
+ <para>
+ The association of data constructors with type families is more dynamic
+ than that is the case with standard data and newtype declarations. In
+ the standard case, the notation <literal>T(..)</literal> in an import or
+ export list denotes the type constructor and all the data constructors
+ introduced in its declaration. However, a family declaration never
+ introduces any data constructors; instead, data constructors are
+ introduced by family instances. As a result, which data constructors
+ are associated with a type family depends on the currently visible
+ instance declarations for that family. Consequently, an import or
+ export item of the form <literal>T(..)</literal> denotes the family
+ constructor and all currently visible data constructors - in the case of
+ an export item, these may be either imported or defined in the current
+ module. The treatment of import and export items that explicitly list
+ data constructors, such as <literal>GMap(GMapEither)</literal>, is
+ analogous.
+ </para>
+
+ <sect4 id="data-family-impexp-assoc">
+ <title>Associated families</title>
+ <para>
+ As expected, an import or export item of the
+ form <literal>C(..)</literal> denotes all of the class' methods and
+ associated types. However, when associated types are explicitly
+ listed as subitems of a class, we need some new syntax, as uppercase
+ identifiers as subitems are usually data constructors, not type
+ constructors. To clarify that we denote types here, each associated
+ type name needs to be prefixed by the keyword <literal>type</literal>.
+ So for example, when explicitly listing the components of
+ the <literal>GMapKey</literal> class, we write <literal>GMapKey(type
+ GMap, empty, lookup, insert)</literal>.
+ </para>
+ </sect4>
+
+ <sect4 id="data-family-impexp-examples">
+ <title>Examples</title>
+ <para>
+ Assuming our running <literal>GMapKey</literal> class example, let us
+ look at some export lists and their meaning:
+ <itemizedlist>
+ <listitem>
+ <para><literal>module GMap (GMapKey) where...</literal>: Exports
+ just the class name.</para>
+ </listitem>
+ <listitem>
+ <para><literal>module GMap (GMapKey(..)) where...</literal>:
+ Exports the class, the associated type <literal>GMap</literal>
+ and the member
+ functions <literal>empty</literal>, <literal>lookup</literal>,
+ and <literal>insert</literal>. None of the data constructors is
+ exported.</para>
+ </listitem>
+ <listitem>
+ <para><literal>module GMap (GMapKey(..), GMap(..))
+ where...</literal>: As before, but also exports all the data
+ constructors <literal>GMapInt</literal>,
+ <literal>GMapChar</literal>,
+ <literal>GMapUnit</literal>, <literal>GMapPair</literal>,
+ and <literal>GMapUnit</literal>.</para>
+ </listitem>
+ <listitem>
+ <para><literal>module GMap (GMapKey(empty, lookup, insert),
+ GMap(..)) where...</literal>: As before.</para>
+ </listitem>
+ <listitem>
+ <para><literal>module GMap (GMapKey, empty, lookup, insert, GMap(..))
+ where...</literal>: As before.</para>
+ </listitem>
+ </itemizedlist>
+ </para>
+ <para>
+ Finally, you can write <literal>GMapKey(type GMap)</literal> to denote
+ both the class <literal>GMapKey</literal> as well as its associated
+ type <literal>GMap</literal>. However, you cannot
+ write <literal>GMapKey(type GMap(..))</literal> — i.e.,
+ sub-component specifications cannot be nested. To
+ specify <literal>GMap</literal>'s data constructors, you have to list
+ it separately.
+ </para>
+ </sect4>
+
+ <sect4 id="data-family-impexp-instances">
+ <title>Instances</title>
+ <para>
+ Family instances are implicitly exported, just like class instances.
+ However, this applies only to the heads of instances, not to the data
+ constructors an instance defines.
+ </para>
+ </sect4>
+
+ </sect3>
+
+</sect2>
+
+<sect2 id="synonym-families">
+ <title>Synonym families</title>
+
+ <para>
+ Type families appear in two flavours: (1) they can be defined on the
+ toplevel or (2) they can appear inside type classes (in which case they
+ are known as associated type synonyms). The former is the more general
+ variant, as it lacks the requirement for the type-indexes to coincide with
+ the class parameters. However, the latter can lead to more clearly
+ structured code and compiler warnings if some type instances were -
+ possibly accidentally - omitted. In the following, we always discuss the
+ general toplevel form first and then cover the additional constraints
+ placed on associated types.
+ </para>
+
+ <sect3 id="type-family-declarations">
+ <title>Type family declarations</title>
+
+ <para>
+ Indexed type families are introduced by a signature, such as
+<programlisting>
+type family Elem c :: *
+</programlisting>
+ The special <literal>family</literal> distinguishes family from standard
+ type declarations. The result kind annotation is optional and, as
+ usual, defaults to <literal>*</literal> if omitted. An example is
+<programlisting>
+type family Elem c
+</programlisting>
+ Parameters can also be given explicit kind signatures if needed. We
+ call the number of parameters in a type family declaration, the family's
+ arity, and all applications of a type family must be fully saturated
+ w.r.t. to that arity. This requirement is unlike ordinary type synonyms
+ and it implies that the kind of a type family is not sufficient to
+ determine a family's arity, and hence in general, also insufficient to
+ determine whether a type family application is well formed. As an
+ example, consider the following declaration:
+<programlisting>
+type family F a b :: * -> * -- F's arity is 2,
+ -- although its overall kind is * -> * -> * -> *
+</programlisting>
+ Given this declaration the following are examples of well-formed and
+ malformed types:
+<programlisting>
+F Char [Int] -- OK! Kind: * -> *
+F Char [Int] Bool -- OK! Kind: *
+F IO Bool -- WRONG: kind mismatch in the first argument
+F Bool -- WRONG: unsaturated application
+</programlisting>
+ </para>
+
+ <sect4 id="assoc-type-family-decl">
+ <title>Associated type family declarations</title>
+ <para>
+ When a type family is declared as part of a type class, we drop
+ the <literal>family</literal> special. The <literal>Elem</literal>
+ declaration takes the following form
+<programlisting>
+class Collects ce where
+ type Elem ce :: *
+ ...
+</programlisting>
+ The argument names of the type family must be class parameters. Each
+ class parameter may only be used at most once per associated type, but
+ some may be omitted and they may be in an order other than in the
+ class head. Hence, the following contrived example is admissible:
+<programlisting>
+class C a b c where
+ type T c a :: *
+</programlisting>
+ These rules are exactly as for associated data families.
+ </para>
+ </sect4>
+ </sect3>
+
+ <sect3 id="type-instance-declarations">
+ <title>Type instance declarations</title>
+ <para>
+ Instance declarations of type families are very similar to standard type
+ synonym declarations. The only two differences are that the
+ keyword <literal>type</literal> is followed
+ by <literal>instance</literal> and that some or all of the type
+ arguments can be non-variable types, but may not contain forall types or
+ type synonym families. However, data families are generally allowed, and
+ type synonyms are allowed as long as they are fully applied and expand
+ to a type that is admissible - these are the exact same requirements as
+ for data instances. For example, the <literal>[e]</literal> instance
+ for <literal>Elem</literal> is
+<programlisting>
+type instance Elem [e] = e
+</programlisting>
+ </para>
+ <para>
+ Type family instance declarations are only legitimate when an
+ appropriate family declaration is in scope - just like class instances
+ require the class declaration to be visible. Moreover, each instance
+ declaration has to conform to the kind determined by its family
+ declaration, and the number of type parameters in an instance
+ declaration must match the number of type parameters in the family
+ declaration. Finally, the right-hand side of a type instance must be a
+ monotype (i.e., it may not include foralls) and after the expansion of
+ all saturated vanilla type synonyms, no synonyms, except family synonyms
+ may remain. Here are some examples of admissible and illegal type
+ instances:
+<programlisting>
+type family F a :: *
+type instance F [Int] = Int -- OK!
+type instance F String = Char -- OK!
+type instance F (F a) = a -- WRONG: type parameter mentions a type family
+type instance F (forall a. (a, b)) = b -- WRONG: a forall type appears in a type parameter
+type instance F Float = forall a.a -- WRONG: right-hand side may not be a forall type
+
+type family G a b :: * -> *
+type instance G Int = (,) -- WRONG: must be two type parameters
+type instance G Int Char Float = Double -- WRONG: must be two type parameters
+</programlisting>
+ </para>
+
+ <sect4 id="assoc-type-instance">
+ <title>Associated type instance declarations</title>
+ <para>
+ When an associated family instance is declared within a type class
+ instance, we drop the <literal>instance</literal> keyword in the family
+ instance. So, the <literal>[e]</literal> instance
+ for <literal>Elem</literal> becomes:
+<programlisting>
+instance (Eq (Elem [e])) => Collects ([e]) where
+ type Elem [e] = e
+ ...
+</programlisting>
+ The most important point about associated family instances is that the
+ type indexes corresponding to class parameters must be identical to the
+ type given in the instance head; here this is <literal>[e]</literal>,
+ which coincides with the only class parameter.
+ </para>
+ <para>
+ Instances for an associated family can only appear as part of instances
+ declarations of the class in which the family was declared - just as
+ with the equations of the methods of a class. Also in correspondence to
+ how methods are handled, declarations of associated types can be omitted
+ in class instances. If an associated family instance is omitted, the
+ corresponding instance type is not inhabited; i.e., only diverging
+ expressions, such as <literal>undefined</literal>, can assume the type.
+ </para>
+ </sect4>
+
+ <sect4 id="type-family-overlap">
+ <title>Overlap of type synonym instances</title>
+ <para>
+ The instance declarations of a type family used in a single program
+ may only overlap if the right-hand sides of the overlapping instances
+ coincide for the overlapping types. More formally, two instance
+ declarations overlap if there is a substitution that makes the
+ left-hand sides of the instances syntactically the same. Whenever
+ that is the case, the right-hand sides of the instances must also be
+ syntactically equal under the same substitution. This condition is
+ independent of whether the type family is associated or not, and it is
+ not only a matter of consistency, but one of type safety.
+ </para>
+ <para>
+ Here are two example to illustrate the condition under which overlap
+ is permitted.
+<programlisting>
+type instance F (a, Int) = [a]
+type instance F (Int, b) = [b] -- overlap permitted
+
+type instance G (a, Int) = [a]
+type instance G (Char, a) = [a] -- ILLEGAL overlap, as [Char] /= [Int]
+</programlisting>
+ </para>
+ </sect4>
+
+ <sect4 id="type-family-decidability">
+ <title>Decidability of type synonym instances</title>
+ <para>
+ In order to guarantee that type inference in the presence of type
+ families decidable, we need to place a number of additional
+ restrictions on the formation of type instance declarations (c.f.,
+ Definition 5 (Relaxed Conditions) of “<ulink
+ url="http://www.cse.unsw.edu.au/~chak/papers/SPCS08.html">Type
+ Checking with Open Type Functions</ulink>”). Instance
+ declarations have the general form
+<programlisting>
+type instance F t1 .. tn = t
+</programlisting>
+ where we require that for every type family application <literal>(G s1
+ .. sm)</literal> in <literal>t</literal>,
+ <orderedlist>
+ <listitem>
+ <para><literal>s1 .. sm</literal> do not contain any type family
+ constructors,</para>
+ </listitem>
+ <listitem>
+ <para>the total number of symbols (data type constructors and type
+ variables) in <literal>s1 .. sm</literal> is strictly smaller than
+ in <literal>t1 .. tn</literal>, and</para>
+ </listitem>
+ <listitem>
+ <para>for every type
+ variable <literal>a</literal>, <literal>a</literal> occurs
+ in <literal>s1 .. sm</literal> at most as often as in <literal>t1
+ .. tn</literal>.</para>
+ </listitem>
+ </orderedlist>
+ These restrictions are easily verified and ensure termination of type
+ inference. However, they are not sufficient to guarantee completeness
+ of type inference in the presence of, so called, ''loopy equalities'',
+ such as <literal>a ~ [F a]</literal>, where a recursive occurrence of
+ a type variable is underneath a family application and data
+ constructor application - see the above mentioned paper for details.
+ </para>
+ <para>
+ If the option <option>-XUndecidableInstances</option> is passed to the
+ compiler, the above restrictions are not enforced and it is on the
+ programmer to ensure termination of the normalisation of type families
+ during type inference.
+ </para>
+ </sect4>
+ </sect3>
+
+ <sect3 id-="equality-constraints">
+ <title>Equality constraints</title>
+ <para>
+ Type context can include equality constraints of the form <literal>t1 ~
+ t2</literal>, which denote that the types <literal>t1</literal>
+ and <literal>t2</literal> need to be the same. In the presence of type
+ families, whether two types are equal cannot generally be decided
+ locally. Hence, the contexts of function signatures may include
+ equality constraints, as in the following example:
+<programlisting>
+sumCollects :: (Collects c1, Collects c2, Elem c1 ~ Elem c2) => c1 -> c2 -> c2
+</programlisting>
+ where we require that the element type of <literal>c1</literal>
+ and <literal>c2</literal> are the same. In general, the
+ types <literal>t1</literal> and <literal>t2</literal> of an equality
+ constraint may be arbitrary monotypes; i.e., they may not contain any
+ quantifiers, independent of whether higher-rank types are otherwise
+ enabled.
+ </para>
+ <para>
+ Equality constraints can also appear in class and instance contexts.
+ The former enable a simple translation of programs using functional
+ dependencies into programs using family synonyms instead. The general
+ idea is to rewrite a class declaration of the form
+<programlisting>
+class C a b | a -> b
+</programlisting>
+ to
+<programlisting>
+class (F a ~ b) => C a b where
+ type F a
+</programlisting>
+ That is, we represent every functional dependency (FD) <literal>a1 .. an
+ -> b</literal> by an FD type family <literal>F a1 .. an</literal> and a
+ superclass context equality <literal>F a1 .. an ~ b</literal>,
+ essentially giving a name to the functional dependency. In class
+ instances, we define the type instances of FD families in accordance
+ with the class head. Method signatures are not affected by that
+ process.
+ </para>
+ <para>
+ NB: Equalities in superclass contexts are not fully implemented in
+ GHC 6.10.
+ </para>
+ </sect3>
+
+ <sect3 id-="ty-fams-in-instances">
+ <title>Type families and instance declarations</title>
+ <para>Type families require us to extend the rules for
+ the form of instance heads, which are given
+ in <xref linkend="flexible-instance-head"/>.
+ Specifically:
+<itemizedlist>
+ <listitem><para>Data type families may appear in an instance head</para></listitem>
+ <listitem><para>Type synonym families may not appear (at all) in an instance head</para></listitem>
+</itemizedlist>
+The reason for the latter restriction is that there is no way to check for. Consider
+<programlisting>
+ type family F a
+ type instance F Bool = Int
+
+ class C a
+
+ instance C Int
+ instance C (F a)
</programlisting>
+Now a constraint <literal>(C (F Bool))</literal> would match both instances.
+The situation is especially bad because the type instance for <literal>F Bool</literal>
+might be in another module, or even in a module that is not yet written.
</para>
-<para>
-Note that deriving <literal>Eq</literal> is necessary for the pattern matching
-to work since it gets translated into an equality comparison.
-</para>
+</sect3>
</sect2>
</sect1>
<sect1 id="other-type-extensions">
<title>Other type system extensions</title>
-<sect2 id="type-restrictions">
-<title>Type signatures</title>
+<sect2 id="explicit-foralls"><title>Explicit universal quantification (forall)</title>
+<para>
+Haskell type signatures are implicitly quantified. When the language option <option>-XExplicitForAll</option>
+is used, the keyword <literal>forall</literal>
+allows us to say exactly what this means. For example:
+</para>
+<para>
+<programlisting>
+ g :: b -> b
+</programlisting>
+means this:
+<programlisting>
+ g :: forall b. (b -> b)
+</programlisting>
+The two are treated identically.
+</para>
+<para>
+Of course <literal>forall</literal> becomes a keyword; you can't use <literal>forall</literal> as
+a type variable any more!
+</para>
+</sect2>
+
-<sect3 id="flexible-contexts"><title>The context of a type signature</title>
+<sect2 id="flexible-contexts"><title>The context of a type signature</title>
<para>
-Unlike Haskell 98, constraints in types do <emphasis>not</emphasis> have to be of
-the form <emphasis>(class type-variable)</emphasis> or
-<emphasis>(class (type-variable type-variable ...))</emphasis>. Thus,
+The <option>-XFlexibleContexts</option> flag lifts the Haskell 98 restriction
+that the type-class constraints in a type signature must have the
+form <emphasis>(class type-variable)</emphasis> or
+<emphasis>(class (type-variable type-variable ...))</emphasis>.
+With <option>-XFlexibleContexts</option>
these type signatures are perfectly OK
<programlisting>
g :: Eq [a] => ...
g :: Ord (T a ()) => ...
</programlisting>
+The flag <option>-XFlexibleContexts</option> also lifts the corresponding
+restriction on class declarations (<xref linkend="superclass-rules"/>) and instance declarations
+(<xref linkend="instance-rules"/>).
</para>
+
<para>
GHC imposes the following restrictions on the constraints in a type signature.
Consider the type:
language omits them; in Haskell 98, all the free type variables of an
explicit source-language type signature are universally quantified,
except for the class type variables in a class declaration. However,
-in GHC, you can give the foralls if you want. See <xref linkend="universal-quantification"/>).
+in GHC, you can give the foralls if you want. See <xref linkend="explicit-foralls"/>).
</para>
<para>
</orderedlist>
</para>
-</sect3>
-
-
</sect2>
</title>
<para>
-Haskell type signatures are implicitly quantified. The new keyword <literal>forall</literal>
-allows us to say exactly what this means. For example:
-</para>
-<para>
-<programlisting>
- g :: b -> b
-</programlisting>
-means this:
-<programlisting>
- g :: forall b. (b -> b)
-</programlisting>
-The two are treated identically.
-</para>
-
-<para>
-However, GHC's type system supports <emphasis>arbitrary-rank</emphasis>
+GHC's type system supports <emphasis>arbitrary-rank</emphasis>
explicit universal quantification in
types.
For example, all the following types are legal:
</itemizedlist>
</para></listitem>
</itemizedlist>
-Of course <literal>forall</literal> becomes a keyword; you can't use <literal>forall</literal> as
-a type variable any more!
</para>
<sect2 id="impredicative-polymorphism">
<title>Impredicative polymorphism
</title>
+<para><emphasis>NOTE: the impredicative-polymorphism feature is deprecated in GHC 6.12, and
+will be removed or replaced in GHC 6.14.</emphasis></para>
+
<para>GHC supports <emphasis>impredicative polymorphism</emphasis>,
enabled with <option>-XImpredicativeTypes</option>.
This means
ys :: [a]
ys = reverse xs
</programlisting>
-The type signature for <literal>f</literal> brings the type variable <literal>a</literal> into scope; it scopes over
-the entire definition of <literal>f</literal>.
-In particular, it is in scope at the type signature for <varname>ys</varname>.
+The type signature for <literal>f</literal> brings the type variable <literal>a</literal> into scope,
+because of the explicit <literal>forall</literal> (<xref linkend="decl-type-sigs"/>).
+The type variables bound by a <literal>forall</literal> scope over
+the entire definition of the accompanying value declaration.
+In this example, the type variable <literal>a</literal> scopes over the whole
+definition of <literal>f</literal>, including over
+the type signature for <varname>ys</varname>.
In Haskell 98 it is not possible to declare
a type for <varname>ys</varname>; a major benefit of scoped type variables is that
it becomes possible to do so.
</para>
</sect2>
-<sect2 id="type-families">
-<title>Type families
-</title>
-
-<para>
-GHC supports the definition of type families indexed by types. They may be
-seen as an extension of Haskell 98's class-based overloading of values to
-types. When type families are declared in classes, they are also known as
-associated types.
-</para>
+<sect2 id="mono-local-binds">
+<title>Monomorphic local bindings</title>
<para>
-There are two forms of type families: data families and type synonym families.
-Currently, only the former are fully implemented, while we are still working
-on the latter. As a result, the specification of the language extension is
-also still to some degree in flux. Hence, a more detailed description of
-the language extension and its use is currently available
-from <ulink url="http://www.haskell.org/haskellwiki/GHC/Indexed_types">the Haskell
-wiki page on type families</ulink>. The material will be moved to this user's
-guide when it has stabilised.
+We are actively thinking of simplifying GHC's type system, by <emphasis>not generalising local bindings</emphasis>.
+The rationale is described in the paper
+<ulink url="http://research.microsoft.com/~simonpj/papers/constraints/index.htm">Let should not be generalised</ulink>.
</para>
<para>
-Type families are enabled by the flag <option>-XTypeFamilies</option>.
+The experimental new behaviour is enabled by the flag <option>-XMonoLocalBinds</option>. The effect is
+that local (that is, non-top-level) bindings without a type signature are not generalised at all. You can
+think of it as an extreme (but much more predictable) version of the Monomorphism Restriction.
+If you supply a type signature, then the flag has no effect.
</para>
-
-
</sect2>
</sect1>
<itemizedlist>
<listitem><para> an expression; the spliced expression must
have type <literal>Q Exp</literal></para></listitem>
- <listitem><para> a list of top-level declarations; the spliced expression must have type <literal>Q [Dec]</literal></para></listitem>
+ <listitem><para> an type; the spliced expression must
+ have type <literal>Q Typ</literal></para></listitem>
+ <listitem><para> a list of top-level declarations; the spliced expression
+ must have type <literal>Q [Dec]</literal></para></listitem>
</itemizedlist>
- </para>
+ Note that pattern splices are not supported.
Inside a splice you can can only call functions defined in imported modules,
- not functions defined elsewhere in the same module.</listitem>
-
+ not functions defined elsewhere in the same module.</para></listitem>
<listitem><para>
A expression quotation is written in Oxford brackets, thus:
<itemizedlist>
- <listitem><para> <literal>[| ... |]</literal>, where the "..." is an expression;
+ <listitem><para> <literal>[| ... |]</literal>, or <literal>[e| ... |]</literal>,
+ where the "..." is an expression;
the quotation has type <literal>Q Exp</literal>.</para></listitem>
<listitem><para> <literal>[d| ... |]</literal>, where the "..." is a list of top-level declarations;
the quotation has type <literal>Q [Dec]</literal>.</para></listitem>
<listitem><para> <literal>[t| ... |]</literal>, where the "..." is a type;
- the quotation has type <literal>Q Typ</literal>.</para></listitem>
+ the quotation has type <literal>Q Type</literal>.</para></listitem>
+ <listitem><para> <literal>[p| ... |]</literal>, where the "..." is a pattern;
+ the quotation has type <literal>Q Pat</literal>.</para></listitem>
</itemizedlist></para></listitem>
<listitem><para>
A quasi-quotation can appear in either a pattern context or an
expression context and is also written in Oxford brackets:
<itemizedlist>
- <listitem><para> <literal>[:<replaceable>varid</replaceable>| ... |]</literal>,
+ <listitem><para> <literal>[<replaceable>varid</replaceable>| ... |]</literal>,
where the "..." is an arbitrary string; a full description of the
quasi-quotation facility is given in <xref linkend="th-quasiquotation"/>.</para></listitem>
</itemizedlist></para></listitem>
</para>
</listitem>
+ <listitem><para> You may omit the <literal>$(...)</literal> in a top-level declaration splice.
+ Simply writing an expression (rather than a declaration) implies a splice. For example, you can write
+<programlisting>
+module Foo where
+import Bar
+
+f x = x
+
+$(deriveStuff 'f) -- Uses the $(...) notation
+
+g y = y+1
+
+deriveStuff 'g -- Omits the $(...)
+
+h z = z-1
+</programlisting>
+ This abbreviation makes top-level declaration slices quieter and less intimidating.
+ </para></listitem>
+
</itemizedlist>
(Compared to the original paper, there are many differences of detail.
The syntax for a declaration splice uses "<literal>$</literal>" not "<literal>splice</literal>".
The type of the enclosed expression must be <literal>Q [Dec]</literal>, not <literal>[Q Dec]</literal>.
-Type splices are not implemented, and neither are pattern splices or quotations.
+Pattern splices and quotations are not implemented.)
</sect2>
Nice to be Quoted: Quasiquoting for Haskell</ulink>" (Proc Haskell Workshop
2007). The example below shows how to write a quasiquoter for a simple
expression language.</para>
-
<para>
-In the example, the quasiquoter <literal>expr</literal> is bound to a value of
-type <literal>Language.Haskell.TH.Quote.QuasiQuoter</literal> which contains two
-functions for quoting expressions and patterns, respectively. The first argument
-to each quoter is the (arbitrary) string enclosed in the Oxford brackets. The
-context of the quasi-quotation statement determines which of the two parsers is
-called: if the quasi-quotation occurs in an expression context, the expression
-parser is called, and if it occurs in a pattern context, the pattern parser is
-called.</para>
+Here are the salient features
+<itemizedlist>
+<listitem><para>
+A quasi-quote has the form
+<literal>[<replaceable>quoter</replaceable>| <replaceable>string</replaceable> |]</literal>.
+<itemizedlist>
+<listitem><para>
+The <replaceable>quoter</replaceable> must be the (unqualified) name of an imported
+quoter; it cannot be an arbitrary expression.
+</para></listitem>
+<listitem><para>
+The <replaceable>quoter</replaceable> cannot be "<literal>e</literal>",
+"<literal>t</literal>", "<literal>d</literal>", or "<literal>p</literal>", since
+those overlap with Template Haskell quotations.
+</para></listitem>
+<listitem><para>
+There must be no spaces in the token
+<literal>[<replaceable>quoter</replaceable>|</literal>.
+</para></listitem>
+<listitem><para>
+The quoted <replaceable>string</replaceable>
+can be arbitrary, and may contain newlines.
+</para></listitem>
+</itemizedlist>
+</para></listitem>
+
+<listitem><para>
+A quasiquote may appear in place of
+<itemizedlist>
+<listitem><para>An expression</para></listitem>
+<listitem><para>A pattern</para></listitem>
+<listitem><para>A type</para></listitem>
+<listitem><para>A top-level declaration</para></listitem>
+</itemizedlist>
+(Only the first two are described in the paper.)
+</para></listitem>
+<listitem><para>
+A quoter is a value of type <literal>Language.Haskell.TH.Quote.QuasiQuoter</literal>,
+which is defined thus:
+<programlisting>
+data QuasiQuoter = QuasiQuoter { quoteExp :: String -> Q Exp,
+ quotePat :: String -> Q Pat,
+ quoteType :: String -> Q Type,
+ quoteDec :: String -> Q [Dec] }
+</programlisting>
+That is, a quoter is a tuple of four parsers, one for each of the contexts
+in which a quasi-quote can occur.
+</para></listitem>
+<listitem><para>
+A quasi-quote is expanded by applying the appropriate parser to the string
+enclosed by the Oxford brackets. The context of the quasi-quote (expression, pattern,
+type, declaration) determines which of the parsers is called.
+</para></listitem>
+</itemizedlist>
+</para>
<para>
-Note that in the example we make use of an antiquoted
+The example below shows quasi-quotation in action. The quoter <literal>expr</literal>
+is bound to a value of type <literal>QuasiQuoter</literal> defined in module <literal>Expr</literal>.
+The example makes use of an antiquoted
variable <literal>n</literal>, indicated by the syntax <literal>'int:n</literal>
(this syntax for anti-quotation was defined by the parser's
author, <emphasis>not</emphasis> by GHC). This binds <literal>n</literal> to the
pattern parser that returns a value of type <literal>Q Pat</literal>.
</para>
-<para>In general, a quasi-quote has the form
-<literal>[$<replaceable>quoter</replaceable>| <replaceable>string</replaceable> |]</literal>.
-The <replaceable>quoter</replaceable> must be the name of an imported quoter; it
-cannot be an arbitrary expression. The quoted <replaceable>string</replaceable>
-can be arbitrary, and may contain newlines.
-</para>
<para>
Quasiquoters must obey the same stage restrictions as Template Haskell, e.g., in
the example, <literal>expr</literal> cannot be defined
</para>
<programlisting>
-
-{- Main.hs -}
+{- ------------- file Main.hs --------------- -}
module Main where
import Expr
main :: IO ()
-main = do { print $ eval [$expr|1 + 2|]
+main = do { print $ eval [expr|1 + 2|]
; case IntExpr 1 of
- { [$expr|'int:n|] -> print n
+ { [expr|'int:n|] -> print n
; _ -> return ()
}
}
-{- Expr.hs -}
+{- ------------- file Expr.hs --------------- -}
module Expr where
import qualified Language.Haskell.TH as TH
-import Language.Haskell.TH.Quasi
+import Language.Haskell.TH.Quote
data Expr = IntExpr Integer
| AntiIntExpr String
opToFun MulOp = (*)
opToFun DivOp = div
-expr = QuasiQuoter parseExprExp parseExprPat
+expr = QuasiQuoter { quoteExp = parseExprExp, quotePat = parseExprPat }
-- Parse an Expr, returning its representation as
-- either a Q Exp or a Q Pat. See the referenced paper
</programlisting>
<para>Now run the compiler:
-</para>
<programlisting>
$ ghc --make -XQuasiQuotes Main.hs -o main
</programlisting>
+</para>
-<para>Run "main" and here is your output:</para>
-
+<para>Run "main" and here is your output:
<programlisting>
$ ./main
3
1
</programlisting>
-
+</para>
</sect2>
</sect1>
“Generalising Monads to Arrows”,
John Hughes, in <citetitle>Science of Computer Programming</citetitle> 37,
pp67–111, May 2000.
+The paper that introduced arrows: a friendly introduction, motivated with
+programming examples.
</para>
</listitem>
<para>
“<ulink url="http://www.soi.city.ac.uk/~ross/papers/notation.html">A New Notation for Arrows</ulink>”,
Ross Paterson, in <citetitle>ICFP</citetitle>, Sep 2001.
+Introduced the notation described here.
</para>
</listitem>
</para>
</listitem>
-</itemizedlist>
-and the arrows web page at
+<listitem>
+<para>
+“<ulink url="http://www.cs.chalmers.se/~rjmh/afp-arrows.pdf">Programming with Arrows</ulink>”,
+John Hughes, in <citetitle>5th International Summer School on
+Advanced Functional Programming</citetitle>,
+<citetitle>Lecture Notes in Computer Science</citetitle> vol. 3622,
+Springer, 2004.
+This paper includes another introduction to the notation,
+with practical examples.
+</para>
+</listitem>
+
+<listitem>
+<para>
+“<ulink url="http://www.haskell.org/ghc/docs/papers/arrow-rules.pdf">Type and Translation Rules for Arrow Notation in GHC</ulink>”,
+Ross Paterson and Simon Peyton Jones, September 16, 2004.
+A terse enumeration of the formal rules used
+(extracted from comments in the source code).
+</para>
+</listitem>
+
+<listitem>
+<para>
+The arrows web page at
<ulink url="http://www.haskell.org/arrows/"><literal>http://www.haskell.org/arrows/</literal></ulink>.
+</para>
+</listitem>
+
+</itemizedlist>
With the <option>-XArrows</option> flag, GHC supports the arrow
-notation described in the second of these papers.
+notation described in the second of these papers,
+translating it using combinators from the
+<ulink url="&libraryBaseLocation;/Control-Arrow.html"><literal>Control.Arrow</literal></ulink>
+module.
What follows is a brief introduction to the notation;
it won't make much sense unless you've read Hughes's paper.
-This notation is translated to ordinary Haskell,
-using combinators from the
-<ulink url="../libraries/base/Control-Arrow.html"><literal>Control.Arrow</literal></ulink>
-module.
</para>
<para>The extension adds a new kind of expression for defining arrows:
<literal>y</literal>.
In the next line, the output is discarded.
The arrow <function>returnA</function> is defined in the
-<ulink url="../libraries/base/Control-Arrow.html"><literal>Control.Arrow</literal></ulink>
+<ulink url="&libraryBaseLocation;/Control-Arrow.html"><literal>Control.Arrow</literal></ulink>
module as <literal>arr id</literal>.
The above example is treated as an abbreviation for
<screen>
Note that variables not used later in the composition are projected out.
After simplification using rewrite rules (see <xref linkend="rewrite-rules"/>)
defined in the
-<ulink url="../libraries/base/Control-Arrow.html"><literal>Control.Arrow</literal></ulink>
+<ulink url="&libraryBaseLocation;/Control-Arrow.html"><literal>Control.Arrow</literal></ulink>
module, this reduces to
<screen>
arr (\ x -> (x+1, x)) >>>
<programlisting>
untilA :: ArrowChoice a => a e () -> a e Bool -> a e ()
untilA body cond = proc x ->
- if cond x then returnA -< ()
+ b <- cond -< x
+ if b then returnA -< ()
else do
body -< x
untilA body cond -< x
<listitem>
<para>
The module must import
-<ulink url="../libraries/base/Control-Arrow.html"><literal>Control.Arrow</literal></ulink>.
+<ulink url="&libraryBaseLocation;/Control-Arrow.html"><literal>Control.Arrow</literal></ulink>.
</para>
</listitem>
<indexterm><primary>Bang patterns</primary></indexterm>
</title>
<para>GHC supports an extension of pattern matching called <emphasis>bang
-patterns</emphasis>. Bang patterns are under consideration for Haskell Prime.
+patterns</emphasis>, written <literal>!<replaceable>pat</replaceable></literal>.
+Bang patterns are under consideration for Haskell Prime.
The <ulink
url="http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/haskell-prime/wiki/BangPatterns">Haskell
prime feature description</ulink> contains more discussion and examples
than the material below.
</para>
<para>
+The key change is the addition of a new rule to the
+<ulink url="http://haskell.org/onlinereport/exps.html#sect3.17.2">semantics of pattern matching in the Haskell 98 report</ulink>.
+Add new bullet 10, saying: Matching the pattern <literal>!</literal><replaceable>pat</replaceable>
+against a value <replaceable>v</replaceable> behaves as follows:
+<itemizedlist>
+<listitem><para>if <replaceable>v</replaceable> is bottom, the match diverges</para></listitem>
+<listitem><para>otherwise, <replaceable>pat</replaceable> is matched against <replaceable>v</replaceable> </para></listitem>
+</itemizedlist>
+</para>
+<para>
Bang patterns are enabled by the flag <option>-XBangPatterns</option>.
</para>
f3 !(x,y) = [x,y]
f4 (x,y) = [x,y]
</programlisting>
-Here, <literal>f3</literal> and <literal>f4</literal> are identical; putting a bang before a pattern that
+Here, <literal>f3</literal> and <literal>f4</literal> are identical;
+putting a bang before a pattern that
forces evaluation anyway does nothing.
-</para><para>
+</para>
+<para>
+There is one (apparent) exception to this general rule that a bang only
+makes a difference when it precedes a variable or wild-card: a bang at the
+top level of a <literal>let</literal> or <literal>where</literal>
+binding makes the binding strict, regardless of the pattern. For example:
+<programlisting>
+let ![x,y] = e in b
+</programlisting>
+is a strict binding: operationally, it evaluates <literal>e</literal>, matches
+it against the pattern <literal>[x,y]</literal>, and then evaluates <literal>b</literal>.
+(We say "apparent" exception because the Right Way to think of it is that the bang
+at the top of a binding is not part of the <emphasis>pattern</emphasis>; rather it
+is part of the syntax of the <emphasis>binding</emphasis>.)
+Nested bangs in a pattern binding behave uniformly with all other forms of
+pattern matching. For example
+<programlisting>
+let (!x,[y]) = e in b
+</programlisting>
+is equivalent to this:
+<programlisting>
+let { t = case e of (x,[y]) -> x `seq` (x,y)
+ x = fst t
+ y = snd t }
+in b
+</programlisting>
+The binding is lazy, but when either <literal>x</literal> or <literal>y</literal> is
+evaluated by <literal>b</literal> the entire pattern is matched, including forcing the
+evaluation of <literal>x</literal>.
+</para>
+<para>
Bang patterns work in <literal>case</literal> expressions too, of course:
<programlisting>
g5 x = let y = f x in body
The functions <literal>g5</literal> and <literal>g6</literal> mean exactly the same thing.
But <literal>g7</literal> evaluates <literal>(f x)</literal>, binds <literal>y</literal> to the
result, and then evaluates <literal>body</literal>.
-</para><para>
-Bang patterns work in <literal>let</literal> and <literal>where</literal>
-definitions too. For example:
-<programlisting>
-let ![x,y] = e in b
-</programlisting>
-is a strict pattern: operationally, it evaluates <literal>e</literal>, matches
-it against the pattern <literal>[x,y]</literal>, and then evaluates <literal>b</literal>
-The "<literal>!</literal>" should not be regarded as part of the pattern; after all,
-in a function argument <literal>![x,y]</literal> means the
-same as <literal>[x,y]</literal>. Rather, the "<literal>!</literal>"
-is part of the syntax of <literal>let</literal> bindings.
</para>
</sect2>
<replaceable>word</replaceable>. The various values for
<replaceable>word</replaceable> that GHC understands are described
in the following sections; any pragma encountered with an
- unrecognised <replaceable>word</replaceable> is (silently)
- ignored.</para>
+ unrecognised <replaceable>word</replaceable> is
+ ignored. The layout rule applies in pragmas, so the closing <literal>#-}</literal>
+ should start in a column to the right of the opening <literal>{-#</literal>. </para>
- <para>Certain pragmas are <emphasis>file-header pragmas</emphasis>. A file-header
- pragma must precede the <literal>module</literal> keyword in the file.
+ <para>Certain pragmas are <emphasis>file-header pragmas</emphasis>:
+ <itemizedlist>
+ <listitem><para>
+ A file-header
+ pragma must precede the <literal>module</literal> keyword in the file.
+ </para></listitem>
+ <listitem><para>
There can be as many file-header pragmas as you please, and they can be
- preceded or followed by comments.</para>
+ preceded or followed by comments.
+ </para></listitem>
+ <listitem><para>
+ File-header pragmas are read once only, before
+ pre-processing the file (e.g. with cpp).
+ </para></listitem>
+ <listitem><para>
+ The file-header pragmas are: <literal>{-# LANGUAGE #-}</literal>,
+ <literal>{-# OPTIONS_GHC #-}</literal>, and
+ <literal>{-# INCLUDE #-}</literal>.
+ </para></listitem>
+ </itemizedlist>
+ </para>
<sect2 id="language-pragma">
<title>LANGUAGE pragma</title>
<para>Any extension from the <literal>Extension</literal> type defined in
<ulink
- url="../libraries/Cabal/Language-Haskell-Extension.html"><literal>Language.Haskell.Extension</literal></ulink>
+ url="&libraryCabalLocation;/Language-Haskell-Extension.html"><literal>Language.Haskell.Extension</literal></ulink>
may be used. GHC will report an error if any of the requested extensions are not supported.</para>
</sect2>
<sect2 id="include-pragma">
<title>INCLUDE pragma</title>
- <para>The <literal>INCLUDE</literal> pragma is for specifying the names
- of C header files that should be <literal>#include</literal>'d into
- the C source code generated by the compiler for the current module (if
- compiling via C). For example:</para>
-
-<programlisting>
-{-# INCLUDE "foo.h" #-}
-{-# INCLUDE <stdio.h> #-}</programlisting>
-
- <para><literal>INCLUDE</literal> is a file-header pragma (see <xref linkend="pragmas"/>).</para>
-
- <para>An <literal>INCLUDE</literal> pragma is the preferred alternative
- to the <option>-#include</option> option (<xref
- linkend="options-C-compiler" />), because the
- <literal>INCLUDE</literal> pragma is understood by other
- compilers. Yet another alternative is to add the include file to each
- <literal>foreign import</literal> declaration in your code, but we
- don't recommend using this approach with GHC.</para>
+ <para>The <literal>INCLUDE</literal> used to be necessary for
+ specifying header files to be included when using the FFI and
+ compiling via C. It is no longer required for GHC, but is
+ accepted (and ignored) for compatibility with other
+ compilers.</para>
</sect2>
- <sect2 id="deprecated-pragma">
- <title>DEPRECATED pragma</title>
- <indexterm><primary>DEPRECATED</primary>
- </indexterm>
+ <sect2 id="warning-deprecated-pragma">
+ <title>WARNING and DEPRECATED pragmas</title>
+ <indexterm><primary>WARNING</primary></indexterm>
+ <indexterm><primary>DEPRECATED</primary></indexterm>
- <para>The DEPRECATED pragma lets you specify that a particular
- function, class, or type, is deprecated. There are two
- forms.
+ <para>The WARNING pragma allows you to attach an arbitrary warning
+ to a particular function, class, or type.
+ A DEPRECATED pragma lets you specify that
+ a particular function, class, or type is deprecated.
+ There are two ways of using these pragmas.
<itemizedlist>
<listitem>
- <para>You can deprecate an entire module thus:</para>
+ <para>You can work on an entire module thus:</para>
<programlisting>
module Wibble {-# DEPRECATED "Use Wobble instead" #-} where
...
</programlisting>
+ <para>Or:</para>
+<programlisting>
+ module Wibble {-# WARNING "This is an unstable interface." #-} where
+ ...
+</programlisting>
<para>When you compile any module that import
<literal>Wibble</literal>, GHC will print the specified
message.</para>
</listitem>
<listitem>
- <para>You can deprecate a function, class, type, or data constructor, with the
- following top-level declaration:</para>
+ <para>You can attach a warning to a function, class, type, or data constructor, with the
+ following top-level declarations:</para>
<programlisting>
{-# DEPRECATED f, C, T "Don't use these" #-}
+ {-# WARNING unsafePerformIO "This is unsafe; I hope you know what you're doing" #-}
</programlisting>
<para>When you compile any module that imports and uses any
of the specified entities, GHC will print the specified
message.</para>
- <para> You can only deprecate entities declared at top level in the module
+ <para> You can only attach to 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 <literal>T</literal>
+ entities. A capitalised name, such as <literal>T</literal>
refers to <emphasis>either</emphasis> the type constructor <literal>T</literal>
<emphasis>or</emphasis> the data constructor <literal>T</literal>, or both if
- both are in scope. If both are in scope, there is currently no way to deprecate
- one without the other (c.f. fixities <xref linkend="infix-tycons"/>).</para>
+ both are in scope. If both are in scope, there is currently no way to
+ specify one without the other (c.f. fixities
+ <xref linkend="infix-tycons"/>).</para>
</listitem>
</itemizedlist>
- Any use of the deprecated item, or of anything from a deprecated
- module, will be flagged with an appropriate message. However,
- deprecations are not reported for
- (a) uses of a deprecated function within its defining module, and
- (b) uses of a deprecated function in an export list.
+ Warnings and deprecations are not reported for
+ (a) uses within the defining module, and
+ (b) uses in an export list.
The latter reduces spurious complaints within a library
in which one module gathers together and re-exports
the exports of several others.
</para>
<para>You can suppress the warnings with the flag
- <option>-fno-warn-deprecations</option>.</para>
+ <option>-fno-warn-warnings-deprecations</option>.</para>
</sect2>
<sect2 id="inline-noinline-pragma">
<programlisting>
key_function :: Int -> String -> (Bool, Double)
-
-#ifdef __GLASGOW_HASKELL__
{-# INLINE key_function #-}
-#endif
</programlisting>
- <para>(You don't need to do the C pre-processor carry-on
- unless you're going to stick the code through HBC—it
- doesn't like <literal>INLINE</literal> pragmas.)</para>
-
<para>The major effect of an <literal>INLINE</literal> pragma
is to declare a function's “cost” to be very low.
The normal unfolding machinery will then be very keen to
All of these effects are aimed at ensuring that what gets inlined is
exactly what you asked for, no more and no less.
</para>
+<para>GHC ensures that inlining cannot go on forever: every mutually-recursive
+group is cut by one or more <emphasis>loop breakers</emphasis> that is never inlined
+(see <ulink url="http://research.microsoft.com/%7Esimonpj/Papers/inlining/index.htm">
+Secrets of the GHC inliner, JFP 12(4) July 2002</ulink>).
+GHC tries not to select a function with an INLINE pragma as a loop breaker, but
+when there is no choice even an INLINE function can be selected, in which case
+the INLINE pragma is ignored.
+For example, for a self-recursive function, the loop breaker can only be the function
+itself, so an INLINE pragma is always ignored.</para>
+
<para>Syntactically, an <literal>INLINE</literal> pragma for a
function can be put anywhere its type signature could be
put.</para>
<literal>UniqueSupply</literal> monad code, we have:</para>
<programlisting>
-#ifdef __GLASGOW_HASKELL__
{-# INLINE thenUs #-}
{-# INLINE returnUs #-}
-#endif
</programlisting>
<para>See also the <literal>NOINLINE</literal> pragma (<xref
linkend="noinline-pragma"/>).</para>
+
+ <para>Note: the HBC compiler doesn't like <literal>INLINE</literal> pragmas,
+ so if you want your code to be HBC-compatible you'll have to surround
+ the pragma with C pre-processor directives
+ <literal>#ifdef __GLASGOW_HASKELL__</literal>...<literal>#endif</literal>.</para>
+
</sect3>
<sect3 id="noinline-pragma">
portable).</para>
</sect3>
+ <sect3 id="conlike-pragma">
+ <title>CONLIKE modifier</title>
+ <indexterm><primary>CONLIKE</primary></indexterm>
+ <para>An INLINE or NOINLINE pragma may have a CONLIKE modifier,
+ which affects matching in RULEs (only). See <xref linkend="conlike"/>.
+ </para>
+ </sect3>
+
<sect3 id="phase-control">
<title>Phase control</title>
</sect3>
</sect2>
+ <sect2 id="annotation-pragmas">
+ <title>ANN pragmas</title>
+
+ <para>GHC offers the ability to annotate various code constructs with additional
+ data by using three pragmas. This data can then be inspected at a later date by
+ using GHC-as-a-library.</para>
+
+ <sect3 id="ann-pragma">
+ <title>Annotating values</title>
+
+ <indexterm><primary>ANN</primary></indexterm>
+
+ <para>Any expression that has both <literal>Typeable</literal> and <literal>Data</literal> instances may be attached to a top-level value
+ binding using an <literal>ANN</literal> pragma. In particular, this means you can use <literal>ANN</literal>
+ to annotate data constructors (e.g. <literal>Just</literal>) as well as normal values (e.g. <literal>take</literal>).
+ By way of example, to annotate the function <literal>foo</literal> with the annotation <literal>Just "Hello"</literal>
+ you would do this:</para>
+
+<programlisting>
+{-# ANN foo (Just "Hello") #-}
+foo = ...
+</programlisting>
+
+ <para>
+ A number of restrictions apply to use of annotations:
+ <itemizedlist>
+ <listitem><para>The binder being annotated must be at the top level (i.e. no nested binders)</para></listitem>
+ <listitem><para>The binder being annotated must be declared in the current module</para></listitem>
+ <listitem><para>The expression you are annotating with must have a type with <literal>Typeable</literal> and <literal>Data</literal> instances</para></listitem>
+ <listitem><para>The <ulink linkend="using-template-haskell">Template Haskell staging restrictions</ulink> apply to the
+ expression being annotated with, so for example you cannot run a function from the module being compiled.</para>
+
+ <para>To be precise, the annotation <literal>{-# ANN x e #-}</literal> is well staged if and only if <literal>$(e)</literal> would be
+ (disregarding the usual type restrictions of the splice syntax, and the usual restriction on splicing inside a splice - <literal>$([|1|])</literal> is fine as an annotation, albeit redundant).</para></listitem>
+ </itemizedlist>
+
+ If you feel strongly that any of these restrictions are too onerous, <ulink url="http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/ghc/wiki/MailingListsAndIRC">
+ please give the GHC team a shout</ulink>.
+ </para>
+
+ <para>However, apart from these restrictions, many things are allowed, including expressions which are not fully evaluated!
+ Annotation expressions will be evaluated by the compiler just like Template Haskell splices are. So, this annotation is fine:</para>
+
+<programlisting>
+{-# ANN f SillyAnnotation { foo = (id 10) + $([| 20 |]), bar = 'f } #-}
+f = ...
+</programlisting>
+ </sect3>
+
+ <sect3 id="typeann-pragma">
+ <title>Annotating types</title>
+
+ <indexterm><primary>ANN type</primary></indexterm>
+ <indexterm><primary>ANN</primary></indexterm>
+
+ <para>You can annotate types with the <literal>ANN</literal> pragma by using the <literal>type</literal> keyword. For example:</para>
+
+<programlisting>
+{-# ANN type Foo (Just "A `Maybe String' annotation") #-}
+data Foo = ...
+</programlisting>
+ </sect3>
+
+ <sect3 id="modann-pragma">
+ <title>Annotating modules</title>
+
+ <indexterm><primary>ANN module</primary></indexterm>
+ <indexterm><primary>ANN</primary></indexterm>
+
+ <para>You can annotate modules with the <literal>ANN</literal> pragma by using the <literal>module</literal> keyword. For example:</para>
+
+<programlisting>
+{-# ANN module (Just "A `Maybe String' annotation") #-}
+</programlisting>
+ </sect3>
+ </sect2>
+
<sect2 id="line-pragma">
<title>LINE pragma</title>
<para>
The programmer can specify rewrite rules as part of the source program
-(in a pragma). GHC applies these rewrite rules wherever it can, provided (a)
-the <option>-O</option> flag (<xref linkend="options-optimise"/>) is on,
-and (b) the <option>-fno-rewrite-rules</option> flag
-(<xref linkend="options-f"/>) is not specified, and (c) the
-<option>-fglasgow-exts</option> (<xref linkend="options-language"/>)
-flag is active.
-</para>
-
-<para>
+(in a pragma).
Here is an example:
<programlisting>
{-# RULES
- "map/map" forall f g xs. map f (map g xs) = map (f.g) xs
- #-}
+ "map/map" forall f g xs. map f (map g xs) = map (f.g) xs
+ #-}
</programlisting>
-
+</para>
+<para>
+Use the debug flag <option>-ddump-simpl-stats</option> to see what rules fired.
+If you need more information, then <option>-ddump-rule-firings</option> shows you
+each individual rule firing in detail.
</para>
<sect2>
From a syntactic point of view:
<itemizedlist>
-<listitem>
+<listitem>
<para>
- There may be zero or more rules in a <literal>RULES</literal> pragma.
+ There may be zero or more rules in a <literal>RULES</literal> pragma, separated by semicolons (which
+ may be generated by the layout rule).
</para>
</listitem>
<listitem>
+<para>
+The layout rule applies in a pragma.
+Currently no new indentation level
+is set, so if you put several rules in single RULES pragma and wish to use layout to separate them,
+you must lay out the starting in the same column as the enclosing definitions.
+<programlisting>
+ {-# RULES
+ "map/map" forall f g xs. map f (map g xs) = map (f.g) xs
+ "map/append" forall f xs ys. map f (xs ++ ys) = map f xs ++ map f ys
+ #-}
+</programlisting>
+Furthermore, the closing <literal>#-}</literal>
+should start in a column to the right of the opening <literal>{-#</literal>.
+</para>
+</listitem>
+<listitem>
<para>
Each rule has a name, enclosed in double quotes. The name itself has
no significance at all. It is only used when reporting how many times the rule fired.
<programlisting>
{-# RULES
"map/map" [2] forall f g xs. map f (map g xs) = map (f.g) xs
- #-}
+ #-}
</programlisting>
The "[2]" means that the rule is active in Phase 2 and subsequent phases. The inverse
notation "[~2]" is also accepted, meaning that the rule is active up to, but not including,
</listitem>
-<listitem>
-
-<para>
- Layout applies in a <literal>RULES</literal> pragma. Currently no new indentation level
-is set, so you must lay out your rules starting in the same column as the
-enclosing definitions.
-</para>
-</listitem>
<listitem>
-
<para>
Each variable mentioned in a rule must either be in scope (e.g. <function>map</function>),
or bound by the <literal>forall</literal> (e.g. <function>f</function>, <function>g</function>, <function>xs</function>). The variables bound by
<listitem>
<para>
- Rules are automatically exported from a module, just as instance declarations are.
+ All rules are implicitly exported from the module, and are therefore
+in force in any module that imports the module that defined the rule, directly
+or indirectly. (That is, if A imports B, which imports C, then C's rules are
+in force when compiling A.) The situation is very similar to that for instance
+declarations.
+</para>
+</listitem>
+
+<listitem>
+
+<para>
+Inside a RULE "<literal>forall</literal>" is treated as a keyword, regardless of
+any other flag settings. Furthermore, inside a RULE, the language extension
+<option>-XScopedTypeVariables</option> is automatically enabled; see
+<xref linkend="scoped-type-variables"/>.
</para>
</listitem>
+<listitem>
+<para>
+Like other pragmas, RULE pragmas are always checked for scope errors, and
+are typechecked. Typechecking means that the LHS and RHS of a rule are typechecked,
+and must have the same type. However, rules are only <emphasis>enabled</emphasis>
+if the <option>-fenable-rewrite-rules</option> flag is
+on (see <xref linkend="rule-semantics"/>).
+</para>
+</listitem>
</itemizedlist>
</para>
</sect2>
-<sect2>
+<sect2 id="rule-semantics">
<title>Semantics</title>
<para>
<itemizedlist>
<listitem>
-
<para>
-Rules are only applied if you use the <option>-O</option> flag.
+Rules are enabled (that is, used during optimisation)
+by the <option>-fenable-rewrite-rules</option> flag.
+This flag is implied by <option>-O</option>, and may be switched
+off (as usual) by <option>-fno-enable-rewrite-rules</option>.
+(NB: enabling <option>-fenable-rewrite-rules</option> without <option>-O</option>
+may not do what you expect, though, because without <option>-O</option> GHC
+ignores all optimisation information in interface files;
+see <option>-fignore-interface-pragmas</option>, <xref linkend="options-f"/>.)
+Note that <option>-fenable-rewrite-rules</option> is an <emphasis>optimisation</emphasis> flag, and
+has no effect on parsing or typechecking.
</para>
</listitem>
<listitem>
<para>
- The LHS and RHS of a rule are typechecked, and must have the
-same type.
-
-</para>
-</listitem>
-<listitem>
-
-<para>
GHC makes absolutely no attempt to verify that the LHS and RHS
of a rule have the same meaning. That is undecidable in general, and
infeasible in most interesting cases. The responsibility is entirely the programmer's!
terminating. For example:
<programlisting>
- "loop" forall x,y. f x y = f y x
+ "loop" forall x y. f x y = f y x
</programlisting>
This rule will cause the compiler to go into an infinite loop.
</para>
</listitem>
-<listitem>
+</itemizedlist>
-<para>
- In the earlier phases of compilation, GHC inlines <emphasis>nothing
-that appears on the LHS of a rule</emphasis>, because once you have substituted
-for something you can't match against it (given the simple minded
-matching). So if you write the rule
+</para>
-<programlisting>
- "map/map" forall f,g. map f . map g = map (f.g)
-</programlisting>
+</sect2>
-this <emphasis>won't</emphasis> match the expression <literal>map f (map g xs)</literal>.
-It will only match something written with explicit use of ".".
-Well, not quite. It <emphasis>will</emphasis> match the expression
+<sect2 id="conlike">
+<title>How rules interact with INLINE/NOINLINE and CONLIKE pragmas</title>
+<para>
+Ordinary inlining happens at the same time as rule rewriting, which may lead to unexpected
+results. Consider this (artificial) example
<programlisting>
-wibble f g xs
-</programlisting>
-
-where <function>wibble</function> is defined:
+f x = x
+g y = f y
+h z = g True
+{-# RULES "f" f True = False #-}
+</programlisting>
+Since <literal>f</literal>'s right-hand side is small, it is inlined into <literal>g</literal>,
+to give
<programlisting>
-wibble f g = map f . map g
+g y = y
</programlisting>
-
-because <function>wibble</function> will be inlined (it's small).
-
-Later on in compilation, GHC starts inlining even things on the
-LHS of rules, but still leaves the rules enabled. This inlining
-policy is controlled by the per-simplification-pass flag <option>-finline-phase</option><emphasis>n</emphasis>.
-
+Now <literal>g</literal> is inlined into <literal>h</literal>, but <literal>f</literal>'s RULE has
+no chance to fire.
+If instead GHC had first inlined <literal>g</literal> into <literal>h</literal> then there
+would have been a better chance that <literal>f</literal>'s RULE might fire.
</para>
-</listitem>
-<listitem>
-
<para>
- All rules are implicitly exported from the module, and are therefore
-in force in any module that imports the module that defined the rule, directly
-or indirectly. (That is, if A imports B, which imports C, then C's rules are
-in force when compiling A.) The situation is very similar to that for instance
-declarations.
+The way to get predictable behaviour is to use a NOINLINE
+pragma, or an INLINE[<replaceable>phase</replaceable>] pragma, on <literal>f</literal>, to ensure
+that it is not inlined until its RULEs have had a chance to fire.
</para>
-</listitem>
-
-</itemizedlist>
-
+<para>
+GHC is very cautious about duplicating work. For example, consider
+<programlisting>
+f k z xs = let xs = build g
+ in ...(foldr k z xs)...sum xs...
+{-# RULES "foldr/build" forall k z g. foldr k z (build g) = g k z #-}
+</programlisting>
+Since <literal>xs</literal> is used twice, GHC does not fire the foldr/build rule. Rightly
+so, because it might take a lot of work to compute <literal>xs</literal>, which would be
+duplicated if the rule fired.
+</para>
+<para>
+Sometimes, however, this approach is over-cautious, and we <emphasis>do</emphasis> want the
+rule to fire, even though doing so would duplicate redex. There is no way that GHC can work out
+when this is a good idea, so we provide the CONLIKE pragma to declare it, thus:
+<programlisting>
+{-# INLINE[1] CONLIKE f #-}
+f x = <replaceable>blah</replaceable>
+</programlisting>
+CONLIKE is a modifier to an INLINE or NOINLINE pragam. It specifies that an application
+of f to one argument (in general, the number of arguments to the left of the '=' sign)
+should be considered cheap enough to duplicate, if such a duplication would make rule
+fire. (The name "CONLIKE" is short for "constructor-like", because constructors certainly
+have such a property.)
+The CONLIKE pragam is a modifier to INLINE/NOINLINE because it really only makes sense to match
+<literal>f</literal> on the LHS of a rule if you are sure that <literal>f</literal> is
+not going to be inlined before the rule has a chance to fire.
</para>
-
</sect2>
<sect2>
</sect2>
-<sect2>
-<title>Controlling what's going on</title>
+<sect2 id="controlling-rules">
+<title>Controlling what's going on in rewrite rules</title>
<para>
<listitem>
<para>
- Use <option>-ddump-rules</option> to see what transformation rules GHC is using.
+Use <option>-ddump-rules</option> to see the rules that are defined
+<emphasis>in this module</emphasis>.
+This includes rules generated by the specialisation pass, but excludes
+rules imported from other modules.
</para>
</listitem>
-<listitem>
+<listitem>
<para>
Use <option>-ddump-simpl-stats</option> to see what rules are being fired.
If you add <option>-dppr-debug</option> you get a more detailed listing.
</para>
</listitem>
+
<listitem>
+<para>
+ Use <option>-ddump-rule-firings</option> to see in great detail what rules are being fired.
+If you add <option>-dppr-debug</option> you get a still more detailed listing.
+</para>
+</listitem>
+<listitem>
<para>
The definition of (say) <function>build</function> in <filename>GHC/Base.lhs</filename> looks like this:
<title>Special built-in functions</title>
<para>GHC has a few built-in functions with special behaviour. These
are now described in the module <ulink
-url="../libraries/base/GHC-Prim.html"><literal>GHC.Prim</literal></ulink>
+url="&libraryGhcPrimLocation;/GHC-Prim.html"><literal>GHC.Prim</literal></ulink>
in the library documentation.</para>
</sect1>
projects / ghc-hetmet.git / blobdiff