Thank you to Richard for the Tweag tutorials on Pattern Synonyms. That third one on Matchers was heavy going. I didn't find an answer (or did I miss it?) to something that's bugging me:
pattern SmartConstr :: Ord a => () => ...
Seems to mean: * Required constraint is Ord a -- fine, for building * Provided constraint is Ord a -- why? for matching/consuming I'm using `SmartConstr` with some logic inside it to validate/build a well-behaved data structure. But this is an ordinary H98 datatype, not a GADT. I don't want to expose the datatype's underlying constructor, because client code could break the abstraction/build an ill-formed data structure. If I pattern-match on `SmartConstr`, the consuming function wants `Ord a`. But I can't always provide `Ord a`, because this isn't a GADT. And the client's function could be doing something that doesn't need `Ord a` -- like counting elements, or showing them or streaming to a List, etc. This feels a lot like one of the things that's wrong with 'stupid theta' datatype contexts. My work-round seems to be to define a second `ReadOnlyConstr` without constraints, that's unidirectional/ can't be used for building. For definiteness, the use case is a underlying non-GADT constructor for a BST
Node :: Tree a -> a -> Tree a -> Tree a
pattern SmartNode :: Ord a => () => Tree a -> a -> Tree a -> Tree a
with the usual semantics that the left Tree holds elements less than this node. Note it's the same `a` with the same `Ord a` 'all the way down' the Tree. If some function is consuming the Tree, it can provide constraints for its own purposes:
member :: Ord a => a -> Tree a -> Bool dumbElem :: Eq a => a -> Tree a -> Bool max :: Ord a => Tree a -> a
(That again is the same thinking behind deprecating datatype contexts.)
countT (SmartNode l x r) = countT l + 1 + countT r -- why infer Ord a => ?
class FancyShow t where fancyShow :: Show a => Int -> t a -> String instance FancyShow Tree where fancyShow indent (SmartNode l x r) = ... -- rejected: Could not deduce Ord a
(Ref the parallel thread on Foldable: client code can't declare an instance for a Constructor class using SmartConstr.) I can see commonly your Provided would be at least the constraints inside the GADT constructor. But why presume I have a GADT? (And yes I get that a devlishly smart pattern might be building different GADT constrs/various constraints, so this is difficult to infer.) AntC