Hi Tom, It's possible I'm misunderstanding what you're saying. The definition tailRecM1, while it typechecks, will not always operate in constant stack space (at least in PureScript). The paper "Stack Safety for Free" provides a pretty much analogous definition by way of illustration and says as much about it. As for tailRecM2, unfortunately this precludes many useful and nontrivial MonadRec instances such as Effect and Aff, which admit no such distributing natural transformation (if this is what you actually meant for the first argument to be). Thanks, Asad On Tue, Sept 27, 2022, 4:00 p.m. Tom Ellis < tom-lists-haskell-cafe-2017@jaguarpaw.co.uk> wrote:
On Tue, Sep 27, 2022 at 10:15:29AM +1000, Isaac Elliott wrote:
https://pursuit.purescript.org/packages/purescript-tailrec/6.1.0/docs/Contro...
seems like a good starting point
Seems like that package may have missed a trick to encode tail recursiveness through a distribution property:
{-# LANGUAGE LambdaCase #-} {-# LANGUAGE DeriveFunctor #-}
module RecExperiment where
data Step a b = Loop a | Done b deriving Functor
tailRec :: (a -> Step a b) -> a -> b tailRec f = go . f where go (Loop a) = go (f a) go (Done b) = b
-- | This works for all monads tailRecM1 :: Monad m => (a -> m (Step a b)) -> a -> m b tailRecM1 f a = do f a >>= \case Loop a' -> tailRecM1 f a' Done b -> pure b
-- | This works for all monads with a "distribute" operation over -- @Step a@ and is guaranteed tail recursive via @tailRec@. tailRecM2 :: Monad m => (m (Step a b) -> Step a (m b)) -> (a -> m (Step a b)) -> a -> m b tailRecM2 distribute f = tailRec (distribute . f) _______________________________________________ Libraries mailing list Libraries@haskell.org http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/libraries