CODEWITHSUNDEEP
haskellghcexistential-typegadt
projedi
projedi

Reputation: 186

GADT and explicit forall on ghc 7.8.2

I'm playing with GADTs and explicit forall on ghc 7.8.2. Let's look at the following simple example:

{-# LANGUAGE GADTs, RankNTypes #-}

data T1 a where
   T1 :: (b -> a) -> b -> T1 a

data T2 a where
   T2 :: forall b. (b -> a) -> b -> T2 a

Here ghc fails with:

Test.hs:7:26: Not in scope: type variable ‘a’
Test.hs:7:35: Not in scope: type variable ‘a’

When T2 is commented out type checking succeeds. But T1 and T2 are seemingly equivalent. Is this a bug in ghc or some limitation of GADTs? If the latter then what is the difference between the two?

Upvotes: 3

Views: 160

Answers (2)

Erik Kaplun
Erik Kaplun

Reputation: 38227

I was struggling with a similar problem. Based on chi's comment, I came up with this solution:

{-# LANGUAGE ExistentialQuantification #-}
{-# LANGUAGE KindSignatures #-}
{-# LANGUAGE GADTs #-}

data T2 :: * -> * where
   T2 :: forall a b. (b -> a) -> b -> T2 a

I would rather have preferred the b to stand out in comparison to the a, but I guess this is still better than an implicit forall for those who prefer it explicit, which includes myself.

Upvotes: 0

projedi
projedi

Reputation: 186

I originally assumed that a in T1 constructor was binded at data T1 a declaration. But it actually is implicitly quantified in a constructor itself. Therefore T2 constructor is wrong because it explicitly quantifies b and doesn't quantify a.

Upvotes: 4

Related Questions