Subject: |
Re: [Haskell-cafe] How to understand the 'forall' ? |
---|---|

From: |
Daniil Elovkov |

Date: |
Wed, 09 Sep 2009 12:08:34 +0400 |

Ryan Ingram wrote: On Tue, Sep 8, 2009 at 12:44 PM, Daniil Elovkov<daniil.elovkov@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:Existential is a perfect word, because it really is data S = exists a. Show a => S [a].If you were going to make "exists" a keyword, I think you would write it like this:data S = ConsS (exists a. Show a => [a])To contrast:data GhcS = forall a. Show a => ConsGhcS [a] data T = ConsT (forall a. Show a => [a])This gives these constructors:ConsS :: forall a. (Show a => [a] -> S) ConsGhcS :: forall a. (Show a => [a] -> S) -- same ConsT :: (forall a. Show a => [a]) -> T -- higher-rank type! Yes, this last one can confuse somebody who tries to understand the
difference between existential quantification and first-class
polymorphism. Because it looks like the former, but really is the latter.
T isn't very useful, it has to be able to provide a list of *any* instance of Show, so probably [] is all you get. But you can do something similar:data N = ConsN (forall a. Num a => [a])Now you getConsN :: (forall a. Num a => [a]) -> Nand you can legally don = ConsN [1,2,3]since [1,2,3] == [fromInteger 1, fromInteger 2, fromInteger 3] :: forall a. Num a => [a] Conceptually, an "S" holds *some* instance of Show, so the user of a constructed S can only use methods of Show; they don't have any further knowledge about what is inside. But a N holds *any* instance of Num, so the user of the data can pick which one they want to use; Integer, Rational, Double, some (Expr Int) instance made by an embedded DSL programmer, etc. Well, that seems to be exactly how I worded it, but with the examples of
data constructor vs function signature, rather than 2 data constructors.
Of course, there are some ways to recover information about what types are inside the existential using GADTs or Data.Dynamic. But those need to be held in the structure itself. For example: This is quite amazing. What follows is almost a literal copy of my code,
which isn't open :) Even the names are very close!
In my version eqTyp is unify :) Hmm, sometimes I think that Haskell allows expressing an intension in so
many ways (and I'm sure it's true), but this...
data Typ a where TBool :: Typ Bool TInt :: Typ Int TFunc :: Typ a -> Typ b -> Typ (a -> b) TList :: Typ a -> Typ [a] TPair :: Typ a -> Typ b -> Typ (a,b)Now you can create an existential type like this:data Something = forall a. Something (Typ a) aand you can extract the value if the type matches:data TEq a b where Refl :: TEq a a extract :: forall a. Typ a -> Something -> Maybe a extract ta (Something tb vb) = do Refl <- eqTyp ta tb return vbThis desugars into ] extract ta (Something tb vb) = ] eqTyp ta tb >>= \x -> ] case x of ] Refl -> return vb ] _ -> fail "pattern match failure" which, since Refl is the only constructor for TEq, simplifies to ] extract ta (Something tb vb) = eqTyp ta tb >>= \Refl -> Just vb The trick is that the pattern match on Refl proves on the right-hand side that "a" is the same type as that held in the existential, so we have successfully extracted information from the existential and can return it to the caller without breaking encapsulation. Here's the helper function eqTyp; it's pretty mechanical:eqTyp :: Typ a -> Typ b -> Maybe (TEq a b) eqTyp TBool TBool = return Refl eqTyp TInt TInt = return Refl eqTyp (TFunc a1 b1) (TFunc a2 b2) = do Refl <- eqTyp a1 a2 Refl <- eqTyp b1 b2 return Refl eqTyp (TList a1) (TList a2) = do Refl <- eqTyp a1 a2 return Refl eqTyp (TPair a1 b1) (TPair a2 b2) = do Refl <- eqTyp a1 a2 Refl <- eqTyp b1 b2 return Refl eqTyp _ _ = NothingHere's a simple test:test = Something (TFun TInt TBool) (\x -> x == 3) runTest = fromJust (extract (TFun TInt TBool) test) 5runTest == False, of course. -- ryan _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@xxxxxxxxxxx http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe |

Previous by Date: | [Haskell-cafe] Re: Snow Leopard breaks GHC, Christian Maeder |
---|---|

Next by Date: | [Haskell-cafe] ANNOUNCE: graphviz-2999.5.0.0, Ivan Lazar Miljenovic |

Previous by Thread: | Re: [Haskell-cafe] How to understand the 'forall' ?, Ryan Ingram |

Next by Thread: | Re: [Haskell-cafe] How to understand the 'forall' ?, Cristiano Paris |

Indexes: | [Date]
[Thread]
[Top]
[All Lists] |