Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Ambiguous type escaping the scope of its equation #7617

Closed
vicuna opened this Issue Sep 1, 2017 · 3 comments

Comments

Projects
None yet
2 participants
@vicuna
Copy link
Collaborator

vicuna commented Sep 1, 2017

Original bug ID: 7617
Reporter: @trefis
Assigned to: @garrigue
Status: resolved (set by @garrigue on 2017-09-12T23:34:27Z)
Resolution: fixed
Priority: normal
Severity: minor
Fixed in version: 4.06.0 +dev/beta1/beta2/rc1
Category: typing
Parent of: #7618
Monitored by: @gasche @yallop

Bug description

The following example typechecks properly:

# type ('a, 'b) eq = Refl : ('a, 'a) eq;;
type ('a, 'b) eq = Refl : ('a, 'a) eq
# let ok (type a b) (x : (a, b) eq) =
    match x, [] with
    | Refl, [(_ : a) | (_ : b)] -> []
  ;;
val ok : ('a, 'b) eq -> 'c list

But I claim it shouldn't as the typechecker will have chosen an arbitrary rigid
type for the ambivalent pattern [(_ : a) | (_ : b)].

This is made more apparent with the following examples:

# let oks (type a b) (x : (a, b) eq) =
    match x, [] with
    | Refl, [(_ : a) | (_ : b)] -> []
    | Refl, [(_ : a) | (_ : b)] -> []
  ;;
val oks : ('a, 'b) eq -> 'c list
# let fails (type a b) (x : (a, b) eq) =
    match x, [] with
    | Refl, [(_ : a) | (_ : b)] -> []
    | Refl, [(_ : b) | (_ : a)] -> []
  ;;
Error: This pattern matches values of type (a, b) eq * b list
       but a pattern was expected which matches values of type
         (a, b) eq * a list
       Type b is not compatible with type a

N.B. this happens both with and without -principal.

@vicuna

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

vicuna commented Sep 5, 2017

Comment author: @garrigue

Actually, the first example is fine: since [] has type forall 'a. 'a list, the type is not escaping.
But the fails example should not fail. We should use a different instance of the scrutinee for each case.

@vicuna

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

vicuna commented Sep 6, 2017

Comment author: @garrigue

Cf. #1318

@vicuna

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

vicuna commented Sep 12, 2017

Comment author: @garrigue

Fixed in trunk by commits 19b37dc and 5c174df.
Do not lower the level when unifying branches of pattern-matching together, and use local environment for unification.

@vicuna vicuna closed this Sep 12, 2017

@vicuna vicuna added the typing label Mar 14, 2019

@vicuna vicuna added the bug label Mar 20, 2019

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
You can’t perform that action at this time.