Ben Rudiak-Gould writes: | Also, the rule would not be quite as simple as you make it out to be, | since | | forall a. (forall b. Foo a b => a -> b) -> Int | | is a legal type, for example. Is it? GHCi gives me an error if I try typing a function like that.
{-# OPTIONS -fglasgow-exts #-} class Foo a b
f :: forall a. (forall b. Foo a b => a -> b) -> Int f = undefined
No instance for (Foo a b)
arising from instantiating a type signature at x.hs:5:4-12
Probable fix: add (Foo a b) to the type signature(s) for `f'
Expected type: (forall b1. (Foo a b1) => a -> b1) -> Int
Inferred type: (a -> b) -> Int
In the definition of `f': f = undefined
I think there would need to be a top-level constraint on |a| to
guarantee that an instance of |Foo a b| exists, like
forall a. (exists c. Foo a c) =>
(forall b. Foo a b => a -> b) -> Int
--
David Menendez