September 2017 - ghc-tickets

[GHC] #12965: String merging broken on Windows
by GHC 26 Nov '18

26 Nov '18

#12965: String merging broken on Windows ----------------------------------------+--------------------------------- Reporter: bgamari | Owner: Type: bug | Status: new Priority: normal | Milestone: 8.2.1 Component: Compiler | Version: 8.0.1 Keywords: | Operating System: Windows Architecture: Unknown/Multiple | Type of failure: None/Unknown Test Case: | Blocked By: Blocking: | Related Tickets: Differential Rev(s): | Wiki Page: ----------------------------------------+--------------------------------- #9577 introduced string literal merging via the linker. Unfortunately I haven't been able to get this to function on Windows, resulting in testsuite failures of #9577. Even `gcc` appears to do the wrong thing here, {{{ $ cat hi.c #include <stdio.h> const char *hi = "hello world"; extern const char *hi2; void main() { printf("%p %p", hi, hi2); } $ cat hi2.c const char *hi2 = "hello world"; $ gcc -c hi.c; gcc -c hi2.c; gcc -fmerge-all-constants hi2.o hi.o $ ./a.exe 0x100403040 0x100403030 $ gcc -s hi2.c $ cat hi2.s .file "hi2.c" .globl hi .section .rdata,"dr" .LC0: .ascii "hello world\0" .data .align 8 hi: .quad .LC0 .ident "GCC: (GNU) 5.3.0" }}} -- Ticket URL: <http://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/12965> GHC <http://www.haskell.org/ghc/> The Glasgow Haskell Compiler

1 10

[GHC] #14190: Typeable imposes seemingly redundant constraints on polykinded instances
by GHC 26 Nov '18

26 Nov '18

#14190: Typeable imposes seemingly redundant constraints on polykinded instances -------------------------------------+------------------------------------- Reporter: dfeuer | Owner: (none) Type: bug | Status: new Priority: normal | Milestone: 8.4.1 Component: Compiler | Version: 8.2.1 (Type checker) | Keywords: | Operating System: Unknown/Multiple TypeableReflection | Architecture: | Type of failure: None/Unknown Unknown/Multiple | Test Case: | Blocked By: Blocking: | Related Tickets: Differential Rev(s): | Wiki Page: -------------------------------------+------------------------------------- To derive `Data` for `Const`, we need {{{#!hs deriving instance (Typeable k, Data a, Typeable (b :: k)) => Data (Const a b) }}} Where's that `Typeable k` constraint come from? It turns out that for reasons I haven't looked into, we can only obtain `Typeable (Const a (b :: k))` if we have `Typeable k`; `(Typeable a, Typeable b)` is insufficient. Is there a reason for that? Annoyingly, we can actually ''get'' that: {{{#!hs weGotThat :: forall k (a :: k). Typeable a :- Typeable k weGotThat = Sub $ withTypeable (typeRepKind (typeRep :: TypeRep a)) Dict }}} But of course that doesn't help us. Could we use `UndecidableSuperClasses` to work around this problem? I think we likely can, although I'm concerned about the performance implications: {{{#!hs class (Typeable a, Typeable' k) => Typeable' (a :: k) instance (Typeable a, Typeable' k) => Typeable' (a :: k) withTypeable' :: forall k (a :: k) r. TypeRep a -> (Typeable' a => r) -> r withTypeable' tr f = withTypeable tr $ withTypeable (typeRepKind (typeRep @a)) f }}} -- Ticket URL: <http://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/14190> GHC <http://www.haskell.org/ghc/> The Glasgow Haskell Compiler

1 16

[GHC] #13573: Add Foldable1 / Traversable1 to base
by GHC 26 Nov '18

26 Nov '18

#13573: Add Foldable1 / Traversable1 to base -------------------------------------+------------------------------------- Reporter: Iceland_jack | Owner: (none) Type: bug | Status: new Priority: normal | Milestone: Component: Compiler | Version: 8.0.1 Keywords: | Operating System: Unknown/Multiple Architecture: | Type of failure: None/Unknown Unknown/Multiple | Test Case: | Blocked By: Blocking: | Related Tickets: #10365 Differential Rev(s): | Wiki Page: -------------------------------------+------------------------------------- `NonEmpty` and `Semigroup` are in ''base'' and are on our way to add `Semigroup` as a superclass of `Monoid` (#10365), this is a fine time to ask if we should include [https://hackage.haskell.org/package/semigroupoids-5.1/docs/Data- Semigroup-Foldable.html Foldable1], [https://hackage.haskell.org/package/semigroupoids-5.1/docs/Data- Semigroup-Traversable.html Traversable1] in ''base'' as well. `Foldable` has partial functions already, functions that only make sense for non-empty structures such as `foldr1`, `foldl1`, `minimum` and `maximum`. There are also functions which ''could'' be defined in terms of `Foldable` like `head` / `tail` (for definition of `unimprove` and `Diff` see [https://github.com/ekmett/semigroupoids/issues/49 semigroupoids issue #49] and this [https://github.com/arkeet/difference/blob/0f0e14f51cf1ecd7ebf2d8c52204bd91a… github] page) {{{#!hs minimum1 :: (Ord a, Foldable1 f) => f a -> a minimum1 = S.getMin . foldMap1 S.Min maximum1 :: (Ord a, Foldable1 f) => f a -> a maximum1 = S.getMax . foldMap1 S.Max head1 :: Foldable1 f => f a -> a head1 = S.getFirst . foldMap1 S.First last1 :: Foldable1 f => f a -> a last1 = S.getLast . foldMap1 S.Last foldr1 :: Foldable1 t => (a -> a -> a) -> (t a -> a) foldr1 f = unimprove . foldMap1 (\a -> Diff (f a) a) foldl1 :: Foldable1 t => (a -> a -> a) -> (t a -> a) foldl1 f = unimprove . getDual . foldMap1 (\a -> Dual $ Diff (flip f a) a) }}} There is also the possibility of adding further functions such as `foldM`, `foldM_`, `foldrM` and `foldlM` for non-empty structures. As usual I don't have more concrete ideas, but let's start by testing the waters before submitting a ghc-proposal. I understand this may be controversial -- Ticket URL: <http://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/13573> GHC <http://www.haskell.org/ghc/> The Glasgow Haskell Compiler

1 22

[GHC] #13362: GHC first generation of GC to be as large as largest cache size by default
by GHC 26 Nov '18

26 Nov '18

#13362: GHC first generation of GC to be as large as largest cache size by default -------------------------------------+------------------------------------- Reporter: varosi | Owner: (none) Type: feature | Status: new request | Priority: normal | Milestone: Component: Runtime | Version: 8.0.2 System | Keywords: numa cache gc | Operating System: Unknown/Multiple Architecture: | Type of failure: None/Unknown Unknown/Multiple | Test Case: | Blocked By: Blocking: | Related Tickets: Differential Rev(s): | Wiki Page: -------------------------------------+------------------------------------- This will improve performance a lot by default. If anyone needs different size - there is "-A" RTS option. Machines are very different. Currently this size is 512k by default for all different architectures and hardware no matter what. In most cases machines with larger caches have more RAM as well and vice versa. So this will affect positively both small and larger machines. It will be most efficient in most cases to keep short lived objects in caches. Most modern workstation and server machines have L3 cache as well, that is why I'm asking for "largest cache size". Second idea will be if there are two short lived generations on machines with second and third level caches with sizes that match both. For NUMA machines with non-unified caches (like [http://www.hardkernel.com/main/products/prdt_info.php?g_code=G143452239825 this strange and non-common ARM]) the common solution could be to set first generation to be with size of the largest cache of smallest core. Which will not be the optimal, but close to. [https://www.reddit.com/r/haskell/comments/5rf1r5/ghc_first_generation_of_gc… Related Reddit discussion] -- Ticket URL: <http://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/13362> GHC <http://www.haskell.org/ghc/> The Glasgow Haskell Compiler

1 22

[GHC] #10844: CallStack should not be inlined
by GHC 26 Nov '18

26 Nov '18

#10844: CallStack should not be inlined -------------------------------------+------------------------------------- Reporter: nomeata | Owner: Type: task | Status: new Priority: normal | Milestone: Component: Compiler | Version: 7.10.2 Keywords: | Operating System: Unknown/Multiple Architecture: | Type of failure: None/Unknown Unknown/Multiple | Test Case: | Blocked By: Blocking: | Related Tickets: Differential Revisions: | -------------------------------------+------------------------------------- The use of CallStack based error messages (since changeset:6740d70d95cb) has led to some code size increase, and I believe this needs to be improved. While investigating the #10788, I was looking at the core produced by that code, and I found this in the code: {{{ -- RHS size: {terms: 2, types: 0, coercions: 0} Main.main17 :: [Char] [GblId, Str=DmdType, Unf=Unf{Src=<vanilla>, TopLvl=True, Value=False, ConLike=False, WorkFree=False, Expandable=False, Guidance=IF_ARGS [] 100 0}] Main.main17 = unpackCString# "vecto_20t0fI93Jj9LUbaZg6e04I"# -- RHS size: {terms: 2, types: 0, coercions: 0} Main.main16 :: [Char] [GblId, Str=DmdType, Unf=Unf{Src=<vanilla>, TopLvl=True, Value=False, ConLike=False, WorkFree=False, Expandable=False, Guidance=IF_ARGS [] 110 0}] Main.main16 = unpackCString# "Data.Vector.Primitive.Mutable"# -- RHS size: {terms: 2, types: 0, coercions: 0} Main.main15 :: [Char] [GblId, Str=DmdType, Unf=Unf{Src=<vanilla>, TopLvl=True, Value=False, ConLike=False, WorkFree=False, Expandable=False, Guidance=IF_ARGS [] 120 0}] Main.main15 = unpackCString# "./Data/Vector/Primitive/Mutable.hs"# -- RHS size: {terms: 2, types: 0, coercions: 0} Main.main14 :: Int [GblId, Caf=NoCafRefs, Str=DmdType, Unf=Unf{Src=<vanilla>, TopLvl=True, Value=True, ConLike=True, WorkFree=True, Expandable=True, Guidance=IF_ARGS [] 10 20}] Main.main14 = I# 97# -- RHS size: {terms: 2, types: 0, coercions: 0} Main.main13 :: Int [GblId, Caf=NoCafRefs, Str=DmdType, Unf=Unf{Src=<vanilla>, TopLvl=True, Value=True, ConLike=True, WorkFree=True, Expandable=True, Guidance=IF_ARGS [] 10 20}] Main.main13 = I# 16# -- RHS size: {terms: 2, types: 0, coercions: 0} Main.main12 :: Int [GblId, Caf=NoCafRefs, Str=DmdType, Unf=Unf{Src=<vanilla>, TopLvl=True, Value=True, ConLike=True, WorkFree=True, Expandable=True, Guidance=IF_ARGS [] 10 20}] Main.main12 = I# 21# -- RHS size: {terms: 8, types: 0, coercions: 0} Main.main11 :: SrcLoc [GblId, Str=DmdType, Unf=Unf{Src=<vanilla>, TopLvl=True, Value=True, ConLike=True, WorkFree=True, Expandable=True, Guidance=IF_ARGS [] 10 80}] Main.main11 = SrcLoc Main.main17 Main.main16 Main.main15 Main.main14 Main.main13 Main.main14 Main.main12 }}} This is clearly a CallStack from a library, and there is no point in copying that into the (every?) use of wherever that came from, as it will only increase code size and slow down compilation. I don’t know how to fix it, though. Float out CallStacks more aggressively? Or is the problem that unfoldings are recorded before that can happen? -- Ticket URL: <http://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/10844> GHC <http://www.haskell.org/ghc/> The Glasgow Haskell Compiler

1 33

[GHC] #10803: New TypeSignatureSections extension
by GHC 26 Nov '18

26 Nov '18

#10803: New TypeSignatureSections extension -------------------------------------+------------------------------------- Reporter: hvr | Owner: Type: bug | Status: new Priority: normal | Milestone: 7.12.1 Component: Compiler | Version: 7.10.2 Keywords: | Operating System: Unknown/Multiple Architecture: | Type of failure: None/Unknown Unknown/Multiple | Test Case: | Blocked By: Blocking: | Related Tickets: Differential Revisions: | -------------------------------------+------------------------------------- = Preliminary specification Have - `(::` ''type'' `)` be syntax sugar for - `(\x -> x ::` ''type'' `)` This new syntax extension is enabled via a new `TypeSignatureSections` language pragma, i.e. {{{#!hs {#- LANGUAGE TypeSignatureSections #-} }}} TODO: formalise this a bit more -- Ticket URL: <http://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/10803> GHC <http://www.haskell.org/ghc/> The Glasgow Haskell Compiler

1 19

[GHC] #12232: Opportunity to do better in register allocations
by GHC 26 Nov '18

26 Nov '18

#12232: Opportunity to do better in register allocations -------------------------------------+------------------------------------- Reporter: harendra | Owner: Type: bug | Status: new Priority: normal | Milestone: Component: Compiler | Version: 8.0.1 (NCG) | Keywords: | Operating System: Unknown/Multiple Architecture: | Type of failure: Runtime Unknown/Multiple | performance bug Test Case: | Blocked By: Blocking: | Related Tickets: #12231 Differential Rev(s): | Wiki Page: -------------------------------------+------------------------------------- [https://github.com/harendra-kumar/unicode-transforms/tree/GHC_PERF_ISSUE This github repo] demonstrates that introduction of one "if" condition which is never taken, degrades the performance of the fast path loop in this particular use case by around 70%, from 2.6ms to 4.4 ms. On investigation I found two main issues. See #12231(ticket) regarding rdeundant allocations. This one is about the other issue regarding register allocations. [https://github.com/harendra-kumar/unicode- transforms/commit/261dbb35e753376e4ee160dab556051738a0be50#diff- 4be4240cb00d1b13a038d1d45fbae235 See this assembly diff] of instructions executed in both cases. The repo has both versions to play with and simpl/stg/cmm/asm are checked in. The first file in the diff is with the if condition and the second one without. To summarize, the introduction of "if" condition adds the following register manipulations before and after the main logic: {{{ # reassignments # rbx -> r10 -> r9 -> r8 -> rdi -> rsi -> rdx -> rcx -> rbx => 0x408d7e: mov %rbx,0x90(%rsp) => 0x408d86: mov %rcx,%rbx => 0x408d89: mov %rdx,%rcx => 0x408d8c: mov %rsi,%rdx => 0x408d8f: mov %rdi,%rsi => 0x408d92: mov %r8,%rdi => 0x408d95: mov %r9,%r8 => 0x408d98: mov %r10,%r9 => 0x408d9b: mov 0x90(%rsp),%r10 . . . loop logic here which uses only %rax, %r10 and %r9 . . . . # _n4s8: # shuffle back to original assignments => 0x4090dc: mov %r14,%r11 => 0x4090df: mov %r9,%r10 => 0x4090e2: mov %r8,%r9 => 0x4090e5: mov %rdi,%r8 => 0x4090e8: mov %rsi,%rdi => 0x4090eb: mov %rdx,%rsi => 0x4090ee: mov %rcx,%rdx => 0x4090f1: mov %rbx,%rcx => 0x4090f4: mov %rax,%rbx => 0x4090f7: mov 0x88(%rsp),%rax => 0x4090ff: jmpq 0x408d2a }}} The registers seem to be getting reassigned here, data flowing from one to the next. In this particular path a lot of these register movements seem unnecessary and are only undone at the end without being used. My suspicion is that this allocation is being done en bloc keeping several paths in mind, just like the heap allocations I reported in the other issue. Some questions to be answered: * Can we make this smarter? * Will `-fregs-graph` do a better job and if not what improvements can be done to graph coloring allocator to do a good job here? I have try that option yet. LLVM assembly trace is also available in the repo. == References == * [1] mail thread: https://mail.haskell.org/pipermail/ghc- devs/2016-June/012243.html * [2] github code repo: https://github.com/harendra-kumar/unicode- transforms/tree/GHC_PERF_ISSUE -- Ticket URL: <http://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/12232> GHC <http://www.haskell.org/ghc/> The Glasgow Haskell Compiler

1 5

[GHC] #13262: Allow type synonym family application in instance head if it reduces away
by GHC 25 Nov '18

25 Nov '18

#13262: Allow type synonym family application in instance head if it reduces away -------------------------------------+------------------------------------- Reporter: ezyang | Owner: Type: feature | Status: new request | Priority: lowest | Milestone: Component: Compiler | Version: 8.0.1 (Type checker) | 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: -------------------------------------+------------------------------------- GHC rejects the following program: {{{ {-# LANGUAGE TypeFamilies, FlexibleInstances #-} module F where type family F a type instance F Int = Int -> Int instance Show (F Int) where show _ = "fun" }}} But this doesn't seem fundamentally problematic to me: at the instance declaration, we know that F Int will reduce, and after that reduction there isn't any problem with the instance. Here's a less restrictive instance head test: first, we reduce type families as much as possible. Then, if there are still leftover non- reducing type families, reject the instance. After having typed this up, I have realized that I don't actually need this feature. But I'm filing it here for posterity. -- Ticket URL: <http://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/13262> GHC <http://www.haskell.org/ghc/> The Glasgow Haskell Compiler

1 14

[GHC] #13773: Types are not normalized in instance declarations
by GHC 25 Nov '18

25 Nov '18

#13773: Types are not normalized in instance declarations -------------------------------------+------------------------------------- Reporter: augustss | Owner: (none) Type: bug | Status: new Priority: normal | Milestone: Component: Compiler | Version: 8.0.1 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 example below. It does not compile, but replacing 5*2 by 10 makes it compile. This is quite annoying since it forces me to do the normalization that the computer is really much better at doing. {{{#!hs module NatInstance where import GHC.TypeLits type N = 5 * 2 data D (n :: Nat) = D instance Show (D N) where show _ = "" }}} -- Ticket URL: <http://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/13773> GHC <http://www.haskell.org/ghc/> The Glasgow Haskell Compiler

1 11

[GHC] #8634: Code valid in GHC 7.6 is impossible to move over GHC 7.7 (because of liberal coverage condition)
by GHC 22 Nov '18

22 Nov '18

#8634: Code valid in GHC 7.6 is impossible to move over GHC 7.7 (because of liberal coverage condition) ------------------------------------+------------------------------------- Reporter: danilo2 | Owner: Type: bug | Status: new Priority: high | Milestone: Component: Compiler | Version: 7.7 Keywords: | Operating System: Unknown/Multiple Architecture: Unknown/Multiple | Type of failure: None/Unknown Difficulty: Unknown | Test Case: Blocked By: | Blocking: Related Tickets: | ------------------------------------+------------------------------------- == Abstract == Hi! I'm writing a compiler, which produces Haskell code. I've discovered it is impossible to keep currently used features / logic using GHC 7.7 instead of 7.6 Below is more detailed description of the problem: == The idea == I'm writing a [DSL][1], which compiles to Haskell. Users of this language can define own immutable data structures and associated functions. By associated function I mean a function, which belongs to a data structure. For example, user can write (in "pythonic" pseudocode): {{{#!python data Vector a: x,y,z :: a def method1(self, x): return x }}} (which is equivalent to the following code, but shows also, that associated functions beheva like type classes with open world assumption): {{{#!python data Vector a: x,y,z :: a def Vector.method1(self, x): return x }}} In this example, `method1` is a function associated with `Vector` data type, and can be used like `v.testid(5)` (where `v` is instance of `Vector` data type). I'm translating such code to Haskell code, but I'm facing a problem, which I'm trying to solve for a long time. == The problem == I'm trying to move the code from GHC 7.6 over GHC 7.7. The code works perfectly under GHC 7.6, but does not under GHC 7.7. I want to ask you how can I fix it to make it working in the new version of the compiler? == Example code == Lets see a simplified version of generated (by my compiler) Haskell code: {{{#!haskell {-# LANGUAGE FlexibleInstances #-} {-# LANGUAGE ScopedTypeVariables #-} {-# LANGUAGE TypeFamilies #-} {-# LANGUAGE UndecidableInstances #-} {-# LANGUAGE FunctionalDependencies #-} import Data.Tuple.OneTuple ------------------------------ -- data types ------------------------------ data Vector a = Vector {x :: a, y :: a, z :: a} deriving (Show) -- the Vector_testid is used as wrapper over a function "testid". newtype Vector_testid a = Vector_testid a ------------------------------ -- sample function, which is associated to data type Vector ------------------------------ testid (v :: Vector a) x = x ------------------------------ -- problematic function (described later) ------------------------------ testx x = call (method1 x) $ OneTuple "test" ------------------------------ -- type classes ------------------------------ -- type class used to access "method1" associated function class Method1 cls m func | cls -> m, cls -> func where method1 :: cls -> m func -- simplified version of type class used to "evaluate" functions based on -- their input. For example: passing empty tuple as first argument of `call` -- indicates evaluating function with default arguments (in this example -- the mechanism of getting default arguments is not available) class Call a b where call :: a -> b ------------------------------ -- type classes instances ------------------------------ instance (out ~ (t1->t1)) => Method1 (Vector a) Vector_testid out where method1 = (Vector_testid . testid) instance (base ~ (OneTuple t1 -> t2)) => Call (Vector_testid base) (OneTuple t1 -> t2) where call (Vector_testid val) = val ------------------------------ -- example usage ------------------------------ main = do let v = Vector (1::Int) (2::Int) (3::Int) -- following lines equals to a pseudocode of ` v.method1 "test" ` -- OneTuple is used to indicate, that we are passing single element. -- In case of more or less elements, ordinary tuples would be used. print $ call (method1 v) $ OneTuple "test" print $ testx v }}} The code compiles and works fine with GHC 7.6. When I'm trying to compile it with GHC 7.7, I'm getting following error: {{{ debug.hs:61:10: Illegal instance declaration for ‛Method1 (Vector a) Vector_testid out’ The liberal coverage condition fails in class ‛Method1’ for functional dependency: ‛cls -> func’ Reason: lhs type ‛Vector a’ does not determine rhs type ‛out’ In the instance declaration for ‛Method1 (Vector a) Vector_testid out’ }}} The error is caused by new rules of checking what functional dependencies can do, namely `liberal coverage condition` (as far as I know, this is `coverage condition` relaxed by using `-XUndecidableInstances`) == Some attemps to fix the problem == I was trying to overcome this problem by changing the definition of `Method1` to: {{{#!haskell class Method1 cls m func | cls -> m where method1 :: cls -> m func }}} Which resolves the problem with functional dependencies, but then the line: {{{#!haskell testx x = call (method1 x) $ OneTuple "test" }}} is not allowed anymore, causing a compile error (in both 7.6 and 7.7 versions): {{{ Could not deduce (Method1 cls m func0) arising from the ambiguity check for ‛testx’ from the context (Method1 cls m func, Call (m func) (OneTuple [Char] -> s)) bound by the inferred type for ‛testx’: (Method1 cls m func, Call (m func) (OneTuple [Char] -> s)) => cls -> s at debug.hs:50:1-44 The type variable ‛func0’ is ambiguous When checking that ‛testx’ has the inferred type ‛forall cls (m :: * -> *) func s. (Method1 cls m func, Call (m func) (OneTuple [Char] -> s)) => cls -> s’ Probable cause: the inferred type is ambiguous }}} It is also impossible to solve this issue using type families (as far as I know). If we replace `Method1` type class and instances with following code (or simmilar): {{{#!haskell class Method1 cls m | cls -> m where type Func cls method1 :: cls -> m (Func cls) instance Method1 (Vector a) Vector_testid where type Func (Vector a) = (t1->t1) method1 = (Vector_testid . testid) }}} We would get obvious error `Not in scope: type variable ‛t1’`, because type families does not allow to use types, which does not appear on LHS of type expression. == The final question == How can I make this idea work under GHC 7.7? I know the new `liberal coverage condition` allows GHC devs make some progress with type checking, but it should somehow be doable to port idea working in GHC 7.6 over never compiler version. (without forcing user of my DSL to introduce any further types - everything so far, like type class instances, I'm genarating using Template Haskell) Maybe is there a way to indroduce an extension, which will disable liberal coverage condition in such situations? There is also a StackOverflow discussion available, here: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/20778588/liberal-coverage-condition- introduced-in-ghc-7-7-breaks-code-valid-in-ghc-7-6 [1]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domain-specific_language -- Ticket URL: <http://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/8634> GHC <http://www.haskell.org/ghc/> The Glasgow Haskell Compiler

1 71