Functions defined with an absurd pattern get no definition in Haskell

[Lucas Escot]

If a function with a single clause is defined with an absurd pattern, only the type signature gets generated in the corresponding Haskell code.

impossible : @0 ⊥ → a
impossible ()
{-# COMPILE impossible #-}

impossible :: a

We probably should have a default clause that throws a runtime error.

[Jesper Cockx]

The idea was that you shouldn't use absurd patterns and instead make an explicit call to the error function.

[Lucas Escot]

Then it should be caught and prevented by agda2hs!