Allow higher-ranked types #3
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This was referenced Jan 7, 2023
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
The readme and cabal description both claim support for higher-rank functions, but it didn't seem to be actually be exposed since the module only exports
parse.Note I've only tested this on top of #2.
Had to "fix" two incomplete pattern matches. I don't really know if
RelConsFunVarshould do something different thanRelVarhere though."Free Theorems for Sublanguages of Haskell" barely mentions higher-rank functions besides claiming they're supported so I wasn't too sure what to expect but results seem to be consistent with first-rank equivalents, at least as far as the relations go. Doesn't look like it goes all the way to actual equations, but that's also happening with type constructor variables (e.g.
(a -> b) -> f a -> f bvs(a -> b) -> [a] -> [b]) so it might be a separate issue. EDIT: #5.