April 2016 - ghc-tickets

[GHC] #10976: Applicative Comprehensions
by GHC 02 Apr '17

02 Apr '17

#10976: Applicative Comprehensions -------------------------------------+------------------------------------- Reporter: davidar | Owner: Type: feature | Status: new request | Priority: normal | Milestone: 8.0.1 Component: Compiler | Version: Keywords: | Operating System: Unknown/Multiple Architecture: | Type of failure: None/Unknown Unknown/Multiple | Test Case: | Blocked By: Blocking: 8914 | Related Tickets: Differential Rev(s): | Wiki Page: -------------------------------------+------------------------------------- As discussed on `ghc-devs`, when both the `MonadComprehensions` and `ApplicativeDo` language extensions are enabled, it should be possible to use comprehension-notation (in addition to do-notation) for `Applicative`s. This would allow, for example, an expression like {{{#!hs (\x y -> x + 2*y) <$> ZipList [1..10] <*> ZipList [10,20..100] }}} to also be written as {{{#!hs [ x + 2*y | x <- ZipList [1..10], y <- ZipList [10,20..100] ] }}} -- Ticket URL: <http://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/10976> GHC <http://www.haskell.org/ghc/> The Glasgow Haskell Compiler

1 4

[GHC] #11612: Bug in ApplicativeDo
by GHC 02 Apr '17

02 Apr '17

#11612: Bug in ApplicativeDo -------------------------------------+------------------------------------- Reporter: simonmar | Owner: Type: bug | Status: new Priority: high | Milestone: 8.0.1 Component: Compiler | Version: 7.10.3 Keywords: | Operating System: Unknown/Multiple Architecture: | Type of failure: None/Unknown Unknown/Multiple | Test Case: | Blocked By: Blocking: | Related Tickets: Differential Rev(s): | Wiki Page: -------------------------------------+------------------------------------- I discovered a bug in `ApplicativeDo`. Fix coming shortly. The problem is illustrated by this test case, which I will add to `ado001.hs` in the testsuite: {{{ test11 :: M () test11 = do x1 <- a let x2 = x1 x3 <- b let x4 = c x5 = x4 return (const () (x1,x2,x3,x4)) }}} Which should give `(a | b)`, but gives `(a ; b)` in 8.0.1 RC. -- Ticket URL: <http://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/11612> GHC <http://www.haskell.org/ghc/> The Glasgow Haskell Compiler

1 6

[GHC] #8501: Improve error message when using rec/mdo keyword without RecursiveDo extention.
by GHC 29 Mar '17

29 Mar '17

#8501: Improve error message when using rec/mdo keyword without RecursiveDo extention. -------------------------------------+------------------------------------- Reporter: shelarcy | Owner: Type: feature request | Status: new Priority: normal | Milestone: Component: Compiler (Parser) | Version: 7.6.3 Keywords: | Operating System: Unknown/Multiple Architecture: Unknown/Multiple | Type of failure: None/Unknown Difficulty: Unknown | Test Case: Blocked By: | Blocking: Related Tickets: #3968 | -------------------------------------+------------------------------------- GHC shows unhelpful error message when using rec keyword and/or mdo keyword without RecursiveDo extention. {{{ module NoRecursiveDo where foo = do rec str <- return "foo" putStrLn str }}} {{{ $ ghc -c NoRecursiveDo.hs NoRecursiveDo1.hs:4:5: Parse error in pattern: rec }}} {{{ module NoRecursiveDo2 where bar = mdo str <- return "bar" putStrLn str }}} {{{ $ ghc -c NoRecursiveDo2.hs NoRecursiveDo2.hs:4:9: parse error on input `<-' }}} {{{ module NoRecursiveDo3 where baz = mdo putStrLn "baz" }}} {{{ $ ghc -c NoRecursiveDo3.hs NoRecursiveDo3.hs:3:7: Not in scope: `mdo' Perhaps you meant `mod' (imported from Prelude) }}} I think that GHC should suggest to use RecursiveDo extention when using mdo/rec keyword. -- Ticket URL: <http://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/8501> GHC <http://www.haskell.org/ghc/> The Glasgow Haskell Compiler

1 6

[GHC] #9418: Warnings about "INLINE binder is (non-rule) loop breaker"
by GHC 27 Mar '17

27 Mar '17

#9418: Warnings about "INLINE binder is (non-rule) loop breaker" -------------------------------------+------------------------------------- Reporter: simonpj | Owner: Type: bug | Status: new Priority: normal | Milestone: Component: Compiler | Version: 7.8.2 Keywords: | Operating System: Architecture: Unknown/Multiple | Unknown/Multiple Difficulty: Unknown | Type of failure: Blocked By: | None/Unknown Related Tickets: | Test Case: | Blocking: | Differential Revisions: -------------------------------------+------------------------------------- Gabor rightly complains: I see literally ''thousands'' of these warnings (in yesterday's and) today's bootstraps: {{{ HC [stage 1] libraries/base/dist-install/build/GHC/Base.o *** Core Lint warnings : in result of Desugar (after optimization) *** {-# LINE 261 "libraries/base/GHC/Base.lhs #-}: Warning: [RHS of $c>>_arr :: forall r_agf a_adQ b_adR. (r_agf -> a_adQ) -> (r_agf -> b_adR) -> r_agf -> b_adR] INLINE binder is (non-rule) loop breaker: $c>>_arr {-# LINE 632 "libraries/base/GHC/Base.lhs #-}: Warning: [RHS of $c>>_apH :: forall a_adQ b_adR. GHC.Types.IO a_adQ -> GHC.Types.IO b_adR -> GHC.Types.IO b_adR] INLINE binder is (non-rule) loop breaker: $c>>_apH }}} }}} This is clearly unsatisfactory, because it is unsettling, and perhaps conceals more important warnings. -- Ticket URL: <http://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/9418> GHC <http://www.haskell.org/ghc/> The Glasgow Haskell Compiler

1 6

[GHC] #9701: GADTs not specialized properly
by GHC 21 Mar '17

21 Mar '17

#9701: GADTs not specialized properly -------------------------------------+------------------------------------- Reporter: dfeuer | Owner: Type: bug | Status: new Priority: normal | Milestone: Component: Compiler | Version: 7.9 Keywords: | Operating System: Architecture: Unknown/Multiple | Unknown/Multiple Difficulty: Unknown | Type of failure: Runtime Blocked By: | performance bug Related Tickets: | Test Case: | Blocking: | Differential Revisions: -------------------------------------+------------------------------------- This has probably been raised before, but I can't find a ticket. If I write {{{#!hs data Silly a where Silly :: Ord a => a -> Silly a isItSilly :: a -> Silly a -> Bool isItSilly a (Silly x) = a < x isItSillyInt :: Int -> Silly Int -> Bool isItSillyInt = isItSilly }}} then I get {{{ isItSilly isItSilly = \ @ a_aBq eta_B2 eta1_B1 -> case eta1_B1 of _ { Silly $dOrd_aBs x_aAy -> < $dOrd_aBs eta_B2 x_aAy } isItSillyInt isItSillyInt = isItSilly }}} Although GHC knows that `eta_B2` is an `Int`, and `x_aAy` therefore must be one as well, it looks up the `<` method in the `eta1_B1` dictionary instead of just using `ltInt`. -- Ticket URL: <http://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/9701> GHC <http://www.haskell.org/ghc/> The Glasgow Haskell Compiler

1 14

[GHC] #8751: Show parenthesised output of expressions in ghci
by GHC 21 Mar '17

21 Mar '17

#8751: Show parenthesised output of expressions in ghci ------------------------------------+------------------------------------- Reporter: Iceland_jack | Owner: Iceland_jack Type: feature request | Status: new Priority: normal | Milestone: Component: GHCi | Version: 7.6.3 Keywords: | Operating System: Unknown/Multiple Architecture: Unknown/Multiple | Type of failure: None/Unknown Difficulty: Unknown | Test Case: Blocked By: | Blocking: Related Tickets: | ------------------------------------+------------------------------------- Operator fixity can be a source of bugs (even for experienced users!),[#point1 (1)] precedence levels may vary between languages and then there are user-defined operators. Attached is a patch for a ghci command allowing users to quickly parenthesise expressions as a sanity check (and as an alternative to using :info and parsing the result yourself). The command itself is activated with `:paren`: {{{ ghci> :paren 2 + 10 * 4 / 3 2 + ((10 * 4) / 3) ghci> :paren \a b → a == b || b && a == (b == a) || b \ a b -> (a == b) || ((b && (a == (b == a))) || b) ghci> :paren 5 + 1 `mod` 2 5 + (1 `mod` 2) ghci> :paren 5 * 1 `mod` 2 (5 * 1) `mod` 2 }}} A friend of mine also pointed out that this could eventually be integrated into `haskell-mode` where the user could temporarily replace an expression with a parenthesised version or have different colours indicate different levels of logical nesting. [=#point1 (1)] [http://www.knosof.co.uk/cbook/accu06.html Developer beliefs about binary operator precedence] -- Ticket URL: <http://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/8751> GHC <http://www.haskell.org/ghc/> The Glasgow Haskell Compiler

1 12

[GHC] #11796: Warn about unwanted instances in a modular way
by GHC 19 Mar '17

19 Mar '17

#11796: Warn about unwanted instances in a modular way -------------------------------------+------------------------------------- Reporter: Lemming | Owner: Type: feature | Status: new request | Priority: normal | Milestone: Component: Compiler | Version: 8.1 Keywords: | Operating System: Unknown/Multiple Architecture: | Type of failure: None/Unknown Unknown/Multiple | Test Case: | Blocked By: Blocking: | Related Tickets: Differential Rev(s): | Wiki Page: -------------------------------------+------------------------------------- I like to propose the following way to warn about instances that are unwanted by some programmers. First step is to mark the instances at their definition site like so: {{{#!hs {-# WARN_INSTANCE tuple #-} instance Foldable ((,) a) where ... {-# WARN_INSTANCE tuple #-} instance Functor ((,) a) where ... {-# WARN_INSTANCE tuple #-} instance Foldable ((,,) a b) where ... {-# WARN_INSTANCE tuple #-} instance Functor ((,,) a b) where ... }}} This way, all the above instances are collected in an instance group labelled `tuple`. At the use sites we introduce a GHC warning option like `-fwarn-instance=tuple`. This warns about any place where any of the `tuple` instances is used. We can either place {{{ GHC-Options: -fwarn-instance=tuple }}} in a Cabal package description in order to issue warnings in a whole package or we can put {{{ {-# OPTIONS_GHC -fwarn-instance=tuple #-} }}} at the top of a module in order to enable the warning per module. Another candidate for an instance group might be `numeric` for numeric instances of functions and tuples in the `NumInstances` package. What does it mean to use an instance? I would say, if omitting an `instance X Y` would lead to a "missing instance" type error at place Z in a module, then `instance X Y` is used at place Z. There might be an even more restrictive option like `-fforbid- instance=tuple`. This would not only warn about an instance usage, but it would cause a type error. Essentially it should treat all `tuple` instances as if they were not defined. (Other instances might depend on `tuple` instances and if the `tuple` instances weren't there the compiler would not even reach the current module. I do not know, whether this case needs special treatment. We might require that any instance depending on `tuple` must be added to the `tuple` group as well or it might be added automatically.) The advantage of a type error is that we see all problems from `tuple` instances also in the presence of other type errors. Warnings would only show up after a module is otherwise type correct. This solution requires cooperation of the instance implementor. Would that work in practice? Otherwise we must think about ways to declare instance groups independently from the instance declaration and we get the problem of bringing the instance group names into the scope of the importing module. A separate discussion must be held on whether `-fwarn-instance=tuple` should be part of `-Wall`. I think that people should be warned about `tuple` instances early because they won't expect that there is a trap when using `length` and `maximum` and so on. One might also think about generalizations, e.g. whether {{{ {-# WARN_INSTANCE tuple, functor #-} }}} should be allowed in order to put an instance in several groups or whether there should be a way to compose a group from subgroups. Another topic would be a form of instance group disambiguation. Instance groups might be qualified with module or package names. I think package names are more appropriate, like so `-fwarn-instance=base:tuple`. -- Ticket URL: <http://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/11796> GHC <http://www.haskell.org/ghc/> The Glasgow Haskell Compiler

1 8

[GHC] #10143: Separate PprFlags (used by Outputable) from DynFlags
by GHC 18 Mar '17

18 Mar '17

#10143: Separate PprFlags (used by Outputable) from DynFlags -------------------------------------+------------------------------------- Reporter: ezyang | Owner: ezyang Type: task | Status: new Priority: normal | Milestone: Component: Compiler | Version: 7.11 Keywords: | Operating System: Unknown/Multiple Architecture: | Type of failure: None/Unknown Unknown/Multiple | Blocked By: Test Case: | Related Tickets: Blocking: | Differential Revisions: | -------------------------------------+------------------------------------- At the moment, SDoc computations have full access to the entirety of DynFlags, despite only a minusculely small amount of the data structure being relevant to them. This proposal is to split out a `PprFlags` structure which will be contained in a `DynFlags`, and contain dynamic flags JUST for pretty-printing. There will be a function `pprFlags :: DynFlags -> PprFlags`. This also helps eliminate the circular dependency between `DynFlags` and `Outputable`. This structure is not complete, but it should give a sense for some of the things that need to be put in here: {{{ data PprFlags = PprFlags { pprUserLength :: Int, pprCols :: Int, useUnicode :: Bool, useUnicodeSyntax :: Bool, targetPlatform :: Platform, suppressUniques :: Bool, errorSpans :: Bool, suppressModulePrefixes :: Bool } }}} I have a patch in-progress which factors this out, but I want to get some sign-offs that this is a good refactoring before I finish it. Thanks! -- Ticket URL: <http://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/10143> GHC <http://www.haskell.org/ghc/> The Glasgow Haskell Compiler

1 17

[GHC] #11431: GHC instantiates levity-polymorphic type variables with foralls
by GHC 16 Mar '17

16 Mar '17

#11431: GHC instantiates levity-polymorphic type variables with foralls -------------------------------------+------------------------------------- Reporter: gridaphobe | Owner: Type: bug | Status: new Priority: normal | Milestone: Component: Compiler | Version: 8.1 Keywords: | Operating System: Unknown/Multiple Architecture: | Type of failure: None/Unknown Unknown/Multiple | Test Case: | Blocked By: Blocking: | Related Tickets: Differential Rev(s): | Wiki Page: -------------------------------------+------------------------------------- Consider the following use of `error`. {{{ ghci> :t error error :: forall (v :: GHC.Types.Levity) (a :: TYPE v). (?callStack::GHC.Stack.Types.CallStack) => [Char] -> a ghci> :t error "bad" :: (forall a. a -> a) -> a error "bad" :: (forall a. a -> a) -> a :: (?callStack::GHC.Stack.Types.CallStack) => (forall a1. a1 -> a1) -> a }}} GHC is instantiating the type variable `a` in the output with `(forall a. a -> a) -> a`, which requires impredicative polymorphism. So this example should actually be rejected by the type checker. Note that GHC also does this with open-kinded type variables, so the behavior with `error` and `undefined` has been around for a while. There are tests that depend on it, and a Note that describes the decision to accept these programs. Still, Simon PJ says perhaps we should really just reject these programs. So here's a ticket to discuss the matter. For more information, see the discussion starting at https://phabricator.haskell.org/D1739#51408. -- Ticket URL: <http://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/11431> GHC <http://www.haskell.org/ghc/> The Glasgow Haskell Compiler

1 7

[GHC] #11450: Associated types at wrong type in instance
by GHC 14 Mar '17

14 Mar '17

#11450: Associated types at wrong type in instance -------------------------------------+------------------------------------- Reporter: simonpj | Owner: Type: bug | Status: new Priority: high | Milestone: 8.0.1 Component: Compiler | Version: 7.10.3 Keywords: | Operating System: Unknown/Multiple Architecture: | Type of failure: None/Unknown Unknown/Multiple | Test Case: | Blocked By: Blocking: | Related Tickets: Differential Rev(s): | Wiki Page: -------------------------------------+------------------------------------- Consider {{{ class C x where type T x instance C (Either a b) where type T (Either b a) = b -> a }}} This is bogus, because the equation for `T` has the parameters to `Either` reversed. -- Ticket URL: <http://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/11450> GHC <http://www.haskell.org/ghc/> The Glasgow Haskell Compiler

1 26