#12989: ($) can have a more general type -------------------------------------+------------------------------------- Reporter: dfeuer | Owner: Type: bug | Status: new Priority: normal | Milestone: Component: Compiler | Version: 8.0.1 (Type checker) | Keywords: | Operating System: Unknown/Multiple Architecture: | Type of failure: None/Unknown Unknown/Multiple | Test Case: | Blocked By: Blocking: | Related Tickets: Differential Rev(s): | Wiki Page: -------------------------------------+------------------------------------- The documentation (in section 9.12.1 for GHC 8; I don't know what section it is in 8.2) suggests a hypothetical type for `($)`: {{{#!hs bad :: forall (r1 :: RuntimeRep) (r2 :: RuntimeRep) (a :: TYPE r1) (b :: TYPE r2). (a -> b) -> a -> b bad f x = f x }}} It explains, correctly, that this definition will not work because `x` has a representation-polymorphic type. However, this doesn't actually explain why `($)` doesn't have that type! Indeed, both GHC 8 and 8.2 accept the following: {{{#!hs good :: forall (r1 :: RuntimeRep) (r2 :: RuntimeRep) (a :: TYPE r1) (b :: TYPE r2). (a -> b) -> a -> b good f = f }}} This has very slightly different semantics, but anyone relying on the difference is already doing something they shouldn't. It may or may not be possible to retain the current semantics with some care and magic, if we so desire. I didn't really know how to characterize this ticket properly. It could be considered a documentation bug or a compiler feature request. -- Ticket URL: http://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/12989 GHC http://www.haskell.org/ghc/ The Glasgow Haskell Compiler