Hi
> I understand this has nothing to do with type checking, but why can't the
> compiler give a warning about this? Or is this by design or because it is
> impossible to check with more complex recursive data types?
Take a look at Catch from Neil Mitchell:
http://www-users.cs.york.ac.uk/~ndm/catch/ .
Using the released version of Catch on the example you gave:
Analysing
Checking [1/1]: Main: Pattern match failure in function at 5:1-5:10.
Partial: "Main.f"
Partial: "Main.main"
Partial: "main"
Answer: 0
This says: the error message you will get is about a pattern match on
line 5 (that's where 'f' is in the example program). The list of
partial functions, in some kind of call-stack order, is Main.f, then
Main.main - i.e. your main function calls f which is partial. Answer 0
means "the necessary precondition for safety is false" - or its not
safe at all.
If you turn on logging Catch will additionally tell you that the
precondition on 'f' is that the data structure must be a 'A'
constructed value.
Thanks
Neil
_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
