#9123: Need for higher kinded roles -------------------------------------+------------------------------------ Reporter: simonpj | Owner: Type: bug | Status: new Priority: normal | Milestone: Component: Compiler | Version: 7.8.2 Resolution: | Keywords: Operating System: Unknown/Multiple | Architecture: Unknown/Multiple Type of failure: None/Unknown | Difficulty: Unknown Test Case: | Blocked By: Blocking: | Related Tickets: -------------------------------------+------------------------------------ Description changed by simonpj: Old description:
This [http://www.haskell.org/pipermail/ghc-devs/2014-May/004964.html thread] on ghc-devs identifies a real shortcoming of the new roles system. Here's a compact example, from the thread {{{ class C m where ret :: a -> m a bind :: m a -> (a -> m b) -> m b join :: m (m a) -> m a
newtype T m a = MkT (m a) deriving( C ) }}} The `deriving(C)` is accepted without `join` in the class, but rejected when `join` is added. And the AMP proposal adds `join` to class `Monad`!
In one way it is rightly rejected: it really would be unsound to derive an instance for `C (T K)` where `K`'s argument had nominal (but not representational) role. But we have no way to limit the type constructors at which `T` can be used.
This deficiency is noted in the [http://research.microsoft.com/en- us/um/people/simonpj/papers/ext-f/ Safe Coercions paper], but this seems to be the first occasion on which it has bitten us badly.
New description: This [http://www.haskell.org/pipermail/ghc-devs/2014-May/004964.html thread] on ghc-devs identifies a real shortcoming of the new roles system. Here's a compact example, from the thread {{{ class C m where ret :: a -> m a bind :: m a -> (a -> m b) -> m b join :: m (m a) -> m a newtype T m a = MkT (m a) deriving( C ) }}} The `deriving(C)` is accepted without `join` in the class, but rejected when `join` is added. And the AMP proposal adds `join` to class `Monad`! In one way it is rightly rejected: it really would be unsound to derive an instance for `C (T K)` where `K`'s argument had nominal (but not representational) role. But we have no way to limit the type constructors at which `T` can be used. This deficiency is noted in the [http://research.microsoft.com/en- us/um/people/simonpj/papers/ext-f/ Safe Coercions paper], but this seems to be the first occasion on which it has bitten us badly. Edward [http://www.haskell.org/pipermail/ghc-devs/2014-May/004974.html made a suggestion] on the thread. -- -- Ticket URL: http://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/9123#comment:1 GHC http://www.haskell.org/ghc/ The Glasgow Haskell Compiler