Ari Fordsham <arifords...@gmail.com> writes: > I don't know if this is the right forum for this, I apologise if I'm > intruding... > Indeed it is! No reason to apologise.
> Are there any plans to use the type system to enforce safety in Core, via > e.g. GADTs? This would replace much of core-lint with static checking. > I am unaware of any plans currently. In general changing GHC's Core language (or even just its Haskell representation) is something that doesn't happen very often and for good reason. To me, giving the Core AST more precise types would be a very significant undertaking (touching a good fraction of the compiler) and it is not clear to me that it wouldn't have compiler performance implications. Afterall, expression types are still runtime-relevant to the compiler and therefore can't be dropped. Moreover, the lifted equality constraints that your GADTs constructors would no doubt carry do have a runtime representation. It's also not clear that catching ill-formed Core statically would pay its way given the inevitable bookkeeping that the more elaborate types would involve; this is especially true given that typing expressions won't eliminate the need for dynamic Core Linting, which would still be necessary to check things like well-scoped-ness. These are my high-level thoughts; to say anything more concrete we would need to consider a concrete proposal. It is certainly an interesting area to explore and while I may be skeptical I would love to be proven wrong. Cheers, - Ben
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ ghc-devs mailing list ghc-devs@haskell.org http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs
