|Version 1 (modified by guest, 6 years ago) (diff)|
Polymorphic Kinds for Haskell
Currently thinking about adding Polymorphic Kinds to GHC... (Currently very WIPish)
Example: At the term level
f :: forall_kind k . forall (m :: k -> *) (a :: k) . m a -> Int f _ = 2 data T m = MkT (m Int) foo = f (Just 2) -- m = Maybe, a = Int bar = f (MkT (Just 2)) -- m = T , a = Maybe
With polymorphic kinds, it should be possible to remove the need for Typeable[1,2,3,..] classes from SYB for kinds that arn't *.
Because we need a way of talking about the types (and hence their kinds) in the type classes' functions, we will need a proxy data type:
data Proxy :: forall k . k -> * forall_kind k . class Typeable (t :: k) where typeOf :: Proxy t -> TypeRep instance Typeable Bool where typeOf _ = mkTyCon "Prelude.Bool"  instance Typeable Maybe where typeOf _ = mkTyConApp (mkTyCon "Prelude.Mabe")  instance Typeable Either where typeOf _ = ... instance (Typeable (t1 :: (* -> *), Typeable (t2 :: *))) => Typeable (t1 t2) where typeOf _ = (typeOf (undefined :: t1)) `mkAppTy` (typeOf (undefined :: t2))
Functions Quantifying over Kinds
For function signatures, we need a way of quantifying over kinds. Options:
Option 1: Add forall_kind (or equivt.) notation
As in the example above, functions would need a new quantifier to explicitly mark when a new kind is being quantified over.
If it were to take the form forall_kind vars . then it shouldn't interact with existing forms.
Option 2: Use forall and infer kind variables from usage
f :: forall k (m :: k -> *) (a :: k) . m a -> Int f _ = 2
In the above example, it is clear* that k must quantify over kinds as it appears in the kind signatures.
- No new syntax
- More complicated for both users and implementaion logic to work out what's going on
Option 3: Completely implicit quantified kind variables
f :: forall (m :: k -> *) (a :: k) . m a -> Int
- In line with haskell type variables being implicitly quantified
- This makes it hard to add additional constraints to the k in future (sort annotations, kind classes?)
- A typo with a rank-n kind could be very confusing, e.g.
f :: forall (m :: k -> (forall k . k' -> *))
class Bar (a :: k -> *) where -- standalone class Bar (a :: k -> *) => Baz (a :: * -> k) where -- superclass, explicit name (shared) class Bar a => Baz (a :: * -> k) where -- superclass, implicit or new name? instance Bang (a :: k -> *) => Bar (a :: k -> *) -- instance implication, explic
class forall k . Blah (a :: k -> *) where
class forall k . Baz (a :: k -> *) => Bar (a :: * -> k) where
Syntax of Kinds
kind ::= * | # | ? | (kind) | kind -> kind | ty :=: ty | forall var . kind | var
Syntax of Types
Type syntax need to be extended with a new binder TODO
Other 'issues' (probably non-issues). Kinds in rank-n types? foobar :: forall k1 (b :: k1) (c :: k1 -> *) . (forall k2 (e :: k2 -> *) (f :: k) . e f -> Int ) -> b c -> Int
data Proxy :: forall k . k -> * foo :: forall (m :: forall k . k -> *) . m Int -> m Maybe -> Int -- This is ok bar = foo Proxy Proxy
data Foo :: forall k . k -> * foo :: forall (m :: (forall k . k -> *) -> *) . m Proxy -> Int -- This line is ok -- has a higher -- ranked kind, but -- that's not an -- issue as we -- have to be -- explicit bar = foo Foo -- This is impredicative (and rejected) as it requires instantiating -- Foo's k to (forall k . k -> *)