`snd $` compiles incorrectly
HeinrichApfelmus opened this issue · comments
There seems to be an issue when compiling the function application operator $ together with snd:
The file
module Test where
open import Haskell.Prelude
test : Int × Int → Int
test = λ x → snd $ x
{-# COMPILE AGDA2HS test #-}is compiled to
module Test where
test :: (Int, Int) -> Int
test = (\ r -> snd r $)which is not valid Haskell.
Apparently, something went wrong with the fixity of $ and the compilation of snd (Agda) to \ r -> snd r (Haskell). It appears to me that a parentheses are missing, a good compilation output would be
test = ((\ r -> snd r) $)Agda2hs version: github:agda/agda2hs?ref=v1.2
I'm investigating this issue at the moment. If one ignores the gratuitous eta-contraction and eta-expansion Agda does for a moment, the real issue seems to be with pretty-printing of sections. We generate a LeftSection () (Lambda ...) op), but hs-src-exts does not put the parentheses around the lambda.
For lambdas specifically this is only a problem for left sections, but here is a similar issue with right sections (not involving lambdas):
test6 : Int → Int
test6 = _- (1 + 1)
{-# COMPILE AGDA2HS test6 #-}gets compiled to the (type-incorrect)
test6 :: Int -> Int
test6 = (- 1 + 1)I am trying to work around the pretty-printer by manually inserting more Parens constructors, but this really seems like something that ought to be handled by the pretty-printing library, not by us.
@flupe proposed in #274 to switch to ghc-source-gen, perhaps that would also fix this issue.
Related: #54
, but this really seems like something that ought to be handled by the pretty-printing library, not by us.
Fair enough. I think that the main focus of haskell-src-exts was parsing rather than pretty-printing. One could imagine submitting a patch or forking a patched version, though.
@flupe proposed in #274 to switch to ghc-source-gen, perhaps that would also fix this issue.
Personally, I wouldn't recommend depending on ghc, because then the version of the pretty-printer will be tightly coupled to the version of the compiler. The ghc-source-gen package does seem to care about supporting older compiler versions, but every new GHC version could still come with a significant maintenance cost.
In the readme for ghc-source-gen it says that it supports ghc 8.2, 8.4, 8.6 and 8.8.
In the readme for ghc-source-gen it says that it supports ghc 8.2, 8.4, 8.6 and 8.8.
Sure. What I mean is that I'm more concerned about forward-portability — when GHC 10.2 is released, will ghc-source-gen adapt quickly enough for agda2hs to be able to switch to GHC 10.2 as well?
I think there are two issues:
- ghc as a dependency of agda2hs (i.e. using ghc to build agda2hs itself).
- ghc as the consumer of code generated by agda2hs.
I don't think these need to be the same version.
In the first case we would have to rely on any libraries being compatible with a new version of ghc. I understand you point to be that despite the fact that haskell-src-exts is unmaintained (/on 'life support') and would not support any new syntax introduced in a new version, as it is more loosely coupled it's more likely to continue to be compatible with new versions of ghc than the better maintained but more tightly coupled ghc-source-gen.
In the second case I don't see such an issue as the new version of ghc is likely to continue to compatible with the syntax of earlier versions.
I understand your point to be that despite the fact that haskell-src-exts is unmaintained […], as it is more loosely coupled it's more likely to continue to be compatible with new versions of ghc than the better maintained but more tightly coupled ghc-source-gen.
Yes, that is what I was trying to say. 👍 Just my two cents, though, not my decision.
thanks! We're looking at the pros and cons.