If you'd like a change in this behavior, please submit a ghc-proposal:
Until then, this ticket is out of scope.\\ This is your point of view, not mine because these are ideas that serve for the ticket, like you, when you write your ideas in other tickets. It's
Otherwise, GHC will run only well-typed programs.\\ Yes. Imagine that behind the argument {{{x}}} there are a hundred other expressions? And still imagines there are hundred other functions like
#14367: Lazy evaluation can be invalidated -------------------------------------+------------------------------------- Reporter: vanto | Owner: (none) Type: bug | Status: new Priority: normal | Milestone: Component: Compiler | Version: 8.2.1 Resolution: | Keywords: Operating System: Unknown/Multiple | Architecture: | Unknown/Multiple Type of failure: Other | Test Case: Blocked By: | Blocking: Related Tickets: | Differential Rev(s): Wiki Page: | -------------------------------------+------------------------------------- Comment (by vanto): Replying to [[span(style=color: #FF0000, goldfire, third time )]]:\\ that's the only accepted way to suggest a change to GHC's specification. \\ Yes I know that but you are not interested in what I say, is'nt it? \\ the same thing. \\ this one? This is possible, you do not know! All these expressions must be well typed. And yet they will never be used. They will still be checked by the type inference algorithm. Waste of time! And possible danger thereafter. We do not keep unnecessary things in a program. The type inference algorithm computes, it does not make any decision. And why? Because it was never thought to do this. It would have been better to ask oneself before checking whether the expression or the function to be used is well typed if it will later serve in another function or in another expression.Otherwise what is the use of testing functions or expressions if we know that they will never be used? Since the language exists, has anyone ever thought of that? The type inference can be improved not by calculation but by adding decision making. But that is another matter, is'nt it? -- Ticket URL: http://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/14367#comment:6 GHC http://www.haskell.org/ghc/ The Glasgow Haskell Compiler