CODEWITHSUNDEEP
haskellequalityliterals
user2744010
user2744010

Reputation: 463

equal sign with haskell literals

What exactly happens in GHCi when I load a file with a line that says: 0=1 ?

I was expecting that this would give an error but it doesn't seem to do anything at all. Does it do anything?

I assume it's equivalent in GHCi to just saying "let 0=1". What does that do?

Upvotes: 19

Views: 640

Answers (3)

nymk
nymk

Reputation: 3393

0=1 is just a pattern binding.

Haskell 2010 Language Report describes


4.4.3 Function and Pattern Bindings

decl    →   (funlhs | pat) rhs

funlhs  →   var apat { apat }
    |   pat varop pat
    |   ( funlhs ) apat { apat }

rhs     →   = exp [where decls]
    |   gdrhs [where decls]

gdrhs   →   guards = exp [gdrhs]

guards  →   | guard1, …, guardn         (n ≥ 1)

guard   →   pat

We distinguish two cases within this syntax: a pattern binding occurs when the left hand side is a pat; otherwise, the binding is called a function binding. Either binding may appear at the top-level of a module or within a where or let construct.

Patterns have this syntax:


pat     →   lpat qconop pat         (infix constructor)
    |   lpat

lpat    →   apat
    |   - (integer | float)         (negative literal)
    |   gcon apat1 … apatk      (arity gcon  =  k, k ≥ 1)

apat    →   var [ @ apat]       (as pattern)
    |   gcon        (arity gcon  =  0)
    |   qcon { fpat1 , … , fpatk }      (labeled pattern, k ≥ 0)
    |   literal
    |   _       (wildcard)
    |   ( pat )         (parenthesized pattern)
    |   ( pat1 , … , patk )         (tuple pattern, k ≥ 2)
    |   [ pat1 , … , patk ]         (list pattern, k ≥ 1)
    |   ~ apat      (irrefutable pattern)

fpat    →   qvar = pat

Language Report also states

A pattern binding binds variables to values. A simple pattern binding has form p = e. The pattern p is matched “lazily” as an irrefutable pattern, as if there were an implicit ~ in front of it.

So, 0 in 0=1 is just a pattern. In essence, 0=1 and x=1 are the same thing. They are both pattern bindings.
The pattern is irrefutable, 0=1 does not fail, thus no error occurred and nothing happened.

If we have the following top level declaration. Something will happen.

x@(Just y) | z /= Nothing = Just 1
  where
    z = Just 0

x and y are binding to Just 1 and 1.

Upvotes: 3

aavogt
aavogt

Reputation: 1308

If you give the failing pattern match a name x, you can also force it like so:

x @ 0 = 1
main = print x

Which produces the error:

FILE.hs: /path/to/FILE.hs:1:5-13: Irrefutable pattern failed for pattern x@0

Upvotes: 9

jberryman
jberryman

Reputation: 16635

The 0 in your let binding is actually a pattern match on the literal 0. I wasn't sure what was going on at first too, but you can confirm this by using strict pattern matching like so:

Prelude> :set -XBangPatterns 
Prelude> let !0 = 1 in 0
*** Exception: <interactive>:13:5-10: Non-exhaustive patterns in pattern binding

Upvotes: 23

Related Questions