#14331: Overzealous free-floating kind check causes deriving clause to be rejected -------------------------------------+------------------------------------- Reporter: RyanGlScott | Owner: (none) Type: bug | Status: merge Priority: normal | Milestone: 8.2.2 Component: Compiler (Type | Version: 8.2.1 checker) | Resolution: | Keywords: deriving Operating System: Unknown/Multiple | Architecture: | Unknown/Multiple Type of failure: GHC rejects | Test Case: valid program | deriving/should_compile/T14331 Blocked By: | Blocking: Related Tickets: | Differential Rev(s): Wiki Page: | -------------------------------------+------------------------------------- Comment (by RyanGlScott): You're right, that should work out in the end. Thank you for the patient explanation, and sorry for being slow on the uptake. Replying to [comment:20 goldfire]:
However, in writing this up, I discovered a new problem. When I write
{{{#!hs class C2 a data D b = D deriving C2 }}}
do I mean
{{{#!hs instance C2 {k -> Type} D }}}
or
{{{#!hs instance C2 {Type} (D b) }}}
? Both are well-kinded and sensible. Right now, we always choose the latter, but I'm not sure why.
The usual convention for figuring out how many type variables to eta reduce from the datatype is to simply count the number of argument types in the kind `k` in `deriving (Cls c1 ... cn :: k -> Constraint)`. In this example, the kind is just a plain kind variable, which we count as having zero arguments. Thus, we don't eta reduce any type variables, resulting in the latter instance. This convention doesn't bother me that much, since if the user wanted to derive `instance C2 D`, they could just as well write `data D a = D deriving (C2 :: (k -> Type) -> Constraint)`. -- Ticket URL: http://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/14331#comment:21 GHC http://www.haskell.org/ghc/ The Glasgow Haskell Compiler