On Sat, 2015-06-13 at 23:07 +0000, Simon Peyton Jones wrote: (I reformat this text a bit)
[..] I finally found time to look into what is happening here. It’s a good illustration of the dangers of overlapping instances. Here is the setup:
* Module ResEuc_
* Contains instance (...) => Ring (ResidueE a) <---- (A) instance (..., Ring (ResidueE a)) => Field (ResidueE a) <---- (B)
* Module PFact__
* Imports Pgcd_, which imports ResEuc_
* Contains code that needs
(Field (ResidueE (UPol (ResidueE Integer)))) <------ (X)
* To solve (X) we use instance (B) from ResEuc_ * And hence we need to solve (Ring (ResidueE (UPol (ResidueE Integer))))
which we do using (A) but not (C)
* Module RsePol_
* Imports PFact__ * Contains the specialised instance
instance (...) => Ring (ResidueE (UPol a)) <------ (C)
which overlaps instance (A)
* Module Main * Needs an instance for
Field (ResidueE (UPol (Residue Integer))) <------ (Y)
* Although GHC *could* generate this by instance declarations, which it would do using (B) and then using (C),
instead GHC cleverly sees that it has generated it before, in module PFact__, and so uses the one from PFact__. And that is what gives rise to your error
So the real problem is that in PFact__, we make an instance (X) that does not see the specialised instance (C). It *cannot* see that instance because RsePol_ imports PFact__.
(is is called Pfact__). Yes, I intended this. And this is not a problem. This is because Pfact_ uses somewhat a smaller knowledge library than there may use further modules which import Pfact_.
So whatever code uses (X) is not going to see the specialised instance.
Why? ghc-7.8.3 treats overlapping instances differently. My intention was (and is) as follows. Compiling Main, the compiler sees the two solutions for (Y): the one imported from Pfact__ -- which implementation (dictionary?) is ready, and another that can be generated using (C) from RsePol_. By the meaning of what are overlapping instances, the compiler must resolve between these two. And this is resolved by the rule of checking the substitutional instance between instances. `Main' imports more knowledge about instances than Pfact_ does, so it is supposed to use an additional knowledge. The fact that one of the overlapping instances is already generated must not be a sufficient reason to set it in Main. This is why I think that ghc-7.8.3 treats the OI notion in a more natural way than ghc-7.10.1 does. May be, ghc-7.10.1 has a better technical tool for this, but ghc-7.8.3 corresponds to a natural notion of OI. Can GHC return to a natural OI notion? Or am I missing something?
I bet that this is not what you intend. This may be a latent bug in DoCon.
If I am not missing anything in my above discourse, then DoCon is all right at this point.
I solved the problem by combining PFact__ and RsePol_ into a single module. Then everything works fine.
I think that this approach will generally lead to great difficulties in composing an application. Please, consider my above explanation and tell me whether I am missing something. Regards, ------ Sergei
What are the general lessons here?
GHC generally assumes that if it generates (C T) in one place, then it can use that anywhere in the program that (C T) is needed. That is, there is only one (C T) dictionary.
· But suppose you have overlapping instance in different modules; say
module A where instance C [a]
module B where import A; instance C [Maybe a]
If you use (C [Maybe Int]) in A, then of course we won’t see the instance in B. So you’ll get a different dictionary than if you compute C [Maybe Int] in module B.
In short, overlapping instances are OK, but it’s best to put them in the same module as the instances they overlap.
Could GHC behave as if all instances were calculated afresh in the module being compiled. Yes, of course it could, but at the cost of losing the benefit of cross-module specialisation. An overloaded function specialised at, say, [Int] in one module could not be re-used in another in case the instances changed.
Simon
| -----Original Message----- | From: ghc-tickets [mailto:ghc-tickets-bounces@haskell.org] On Behalf Of | Sergei Meshveliani | Sent: 23 May 2015 22:08 | To: glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org | Cc: glasgow-haskell-bugs@haskell.org | Subject: overlapping instances in 7.10.1
| Dear GHC developers, | | This request overrides my previous one of "7.10.1-err..." | (it is simpler and more precise). | The archive
| http://www.botik.ru/pub/local/Mechveliani/ghcQuest/7.10.1-errReport- | may23-2015.zip | | presents a question about ghc-7.10.1.
| Make it, please, with ghc-7.10.1 by
| ghc $doconCpOpt -O --make Main | , | $doconCpOpt =
| -fwarn-unused-matches -fwarn-unused-binds -fwarn-unused-imports | -fno-warn-overlapping-patterns -XRecordWildCards -XNamedFieldPuns | -XFlexibleContexts -XMultiParamTypeClasses -XUndecidableInstances | -XTypeSynonymInstances -XFlexibleInstances -fcontext-stack=30
| | as it is written there in README.txt. | README.txt explains which two instances are wrongly resolved | -- as I expect.
| In ghc-7.8.2 they are resolved in a correct way | (and there is a different pragma syntax). | I conclude this from running the test in docon-2.12.
| Am I missing something? | Please, advise,
| ------ | Sergei