CODEWITHSUNDEEP
haskelldependent-type
András Kovács
András Kovács

Reputation: 30103

Erratic hole type resolution

I recently found out that type holes combined with pattern matching on proofs provides a pretty nice Agda-like experience in Haskell. For example:

{-# LANGUAGE
    DataKinds, PolyKinds, TypeFamilies, 
    UndecidableInstances, GADTs, TypeOperators #-}

data (==) :: k -> k -> * where
    Refl :: x == x

sym :: a == b -> b == a
sym Refl = Refl 

data Nat = Zero | Succ Nat

data SNat :: Nat -> * where
    SZero :: SNat Zero
    SSucc :: SNat n -> SNat (Succ n)

type family a + b where
    Zero   + b = b
    Succ a + b = Succ (a + b)

addAssoc :: SNat a -> SNat b -> SNat c -> (a + (b + c)) == ((a + b) + c)
addAssoc SZero b c = Refl
addAssoc (SSucc a) b c = case addAssoc a b c of Refl -> Refl

addComm :: SNat a -> SNat b -> (a + b) == (b + a)
addComm SZero SZero = Refl
addComm (SSucc a) SZero = case addComm a SZero of Refl -> Refl
addComm SZero (SSucc b) = case addComm SZero b of Refl -> Refl
addComm sa@(SSucc a) sb@(SSucc b) =
    case addComm a sb of
        Refl -> case addComm b sa of
            Refl -> case addComm a b of
                Refl -> Refl

The really nice thing is that I can replace the right-hand sides of the Refl -> exp constructions with a type hole, and my hole target types are updated with the proof, pretty much as with the rewrite form in Agda.

However, sometimes the hole just fails to update:

(+.) :: SNat a -> SNat b -> SNat (a + b)
SZero   +. b = b
SSucc a +. b = SSucc (a +. b)
infixl 5 +.

type family a * b where
    Zero   * b = Zero
    Succ a * b = b + (a * b)

(*.) :: SNat a -> SNat b -> SNat (a * b)
SZero   *. b = SZero
SSucc a *. b = b +. (a *. b)
infixl 6 *.

mulDistL :: SNat a -> SNat b -> SNat c -> (a * (b + c)) == ((a * b) + (a * c))
mulDistL SZero b c = Refl
mulDistL (SSucc a) b c = 
    case sym $ addAssoc b (a *. b) (c +. a *. c) of
        -- At this point the target type is
        -- ((b + c) + (n * (b + c))) == (b + ((n * b) + (c + (n * c))))
        -- The next step would be to update the RHS of the equivalence:
        Refl -> case addAssoc (a *. b) c (a *. c) of
            Refl -> _ -- but the type of this hole remains unchanged...

Also, even though the target types do not necessarily line up inside the proof, if I paste in the whole thing from Agda it still checks fine:

mulDistL' :: SNat a -> SNat b -> SNat c -> (a * (b + c)) == ((a * b) + (a * c))
mulDistL' SZero b c = Refl
mulDistL' (SSucc a) b c = case
    (sym $ addAssoc b (a *. b) (c +. a *. c),
    addAssoc (a *. b) c (a *. c),
    addComm (a *. b) c,
    sym $ addAssoc c (a *. b) (a *. c),
    addAssoc b c (a *. b +. a *. c),
    mulDistL' a b c
    ) of (Refl, Refl, Refl, Refl, Refl, Refl) -> Refl

Do you have any ideas why this happens (or how I could do proof rewriting in a robust way)?

Upvotes: 104

Views: 2322

Answers (2)

Billykart
Billykart

Reputation: 19

If you want to generate all possible such values, then you can write a function to do so, either with provided or specified bounds.

It may very well be possible to use type-level Church Numerals or some such so as to enforce creation of these, but it's almost definitely too much work for what you probably want/need.

This might not be what you want (i.e. "Except of using just (x, y) since z = 5 - x - y") but it makes more sense than trying to have some kind of enforced restriction on the type level for allowing valid values.

Upvotes: 1

ajay
ajay

Reputation: 27

It happens because the values are determined at run time. It can bring about a transformation of values depending on what are entered at run time hence it assumes that the hole is already updated.

Upvotes: -3

Related Questions