summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/testsuite/tests/typecheck/should_compile/tc091.hs
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
Diffstat (limited to 'testsuite/tests/typecheck/should_compile/tc091.hs')
-rw-r--r--testsuite/tests/typecheck/should_compile/tc091.hs67
1 files changed, 67 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/testsuite/tests/typecheck/should_compile/tc091.hs b/testsuite/tests/typecheck/should_compile/tc091.hs
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000..628b571c61
--- /dev/null
+++ b/testsuite/tests/typecheck/should_compile/tc091.hs
@@ -0,0 +1,67 @@
+-- !!! Test polymorphic recursion
+
+
+-- With polymorphic recursion this one becomes legal
+-- SLPJ June 97.
+
+{-
+To: Lennart Augustsson <augustss@cs.chalmers.se>
+Cc: partain@dcs.gla.ac.uk, John Peterson (Yale) <peterson-john@cs.yale.edu>,
+ simonpj@dcs.gla.ac.uk
+Subject: Type checking matter
+Date: Fri, 23 Oct 92 15:28:38 +0100
+From: Simon L Peyton Jones <simonpj@dcs.gla.ac.uk>
+
+
+I've looked at the enclosed again. It seems to me that
+since "s" includes a recursive call to "sort", inside the body
+of "sort", then "sort" is monomorphic, and hence so is "s";
+hence the type signature (which claims full polymorphism) is
+wrong.
+
+[Lennart says he can't see any free variables inside "s", but there
+is one, namely "sort"!]
+
+Will: one for the should-fail suite?
+
+Simon
+
+
+------- Forwarded Message
+
+
+From: Lennart Augustsson <augustss@cs.chalmers.se>
+To: partain
+Subject: Re: just to show you I'm a nice guy...
+Date: Tue, 26 May 92 17:30:12 +0200
+
+> Here's a fairly simple module from our compiler, which includes what
+> we claim is an illegal type signature (grep ILLEGAL ...).
+> Last time I checked, hbc accepted this module.
+
+Not that I don't believe you, but why is this illegal?
+As far as I can see there are no free variables in the function s,
+which makes me believe that it can typechecked like a top level
+definition. And for a top level defn the signature should be
+all right.
+
+ -- Lennart
+- ------- End of forwarded message -------
+-}
+module ShouldSucceed where
+
+sort :: Ord a => [a] -> [a]
+sort xs = s xs (length xs)
+ where
+ s :: Ord b => [b] -> Int -> [b] -- This signature is WRONG
+ s xs k = if k <= 1 then xs
+ else merge (sort ys) (sort zs)
+ where (ys,zs) = init_last xs (k `div` (2::Int))
+
+-- Defns of merge and init_last are just dummies with the correct types
+merge :: Ord a => [a] -> [a] -> [a]
+merge xs ys = xs
+
+init_last :: [a] -> Int -> ([a],[a])
+init_last a b = (a,a)
+