Newest at the top
| 2025-03-12 06:31:19 +0100 | j1n37- | (~j1n37@user/j1n37) (Read error: Connection reset by peer) |
| 2025-03-12 06:28:30 +0100 | merijn | (~merijn@host-vr.cgnat-g.v4.dfn.nl) merijn |
| 2025-03-12 06:28:09 +0100 | alfiee | (~alfiee@user/alfiee) alfiee |
| 2025-03-12 06:23:32 +0100 | robobub | (uid248673@id-248673.uxbridge.irccloud.com) robobub |
| 2025-03-12 06:20:52 +0100 | sabathan | (~sabathan@amarseille-159-1-12-107.w86-203.abo.wanadoo.fr) |
| 2025-03-12 06:17:33 +0100 | merijn | (~merijn@host-vr.cgnat-g.v4.dfn.nl) (Ping timeout: 246 seconds) |
| 2025-03-12 06:17:11 +0100 | sabathan | (~sabathan@amarseille-159-1-12-107.w86-203.abo.wanadoo.fr) (Read error: Connection reset by peer) |
| 2025-03-12 06:13:07 +0100 | merijn | (~merijn@host-vr.cgnat-g.v4.dfn.nl) merijn |
| 2025-03-12 06:06:58 +0100 | j1n37 | (~j1n37@user/j1n37) (Ping timeout: 272 seconds) |
| 2025-03-12 06:06:07 +0100 | j1n37- | (~j1n37@user/j1n37) j1n37 |
| 2025-03-12 06:02:05 +0100 | merijn | (~merijn@host-vr.cgnat-g.v4.dfn.nl) (Ping timeout: 244 seconds) |
| 2025-03-12 05:57:44 +0100 | merijn | (~merijn@host-vr.cgnat-g.v4.dfn.nl) merijn |
| 2025-03-12 05:57:10 +0100 | jmcantrell | (~weechat@user/jmcantrell) (Quit: WeeChat 4.5.2) |
| 2025-03-12 05:56:26 +0100 | tusko | (uid478376@user/tusko) tusko |
| 2025-03-12 05:55:13 +0100 | <c_wraith> | yes. the solver always shrinks the problem with the default rules |
| 2025-03-12 05:55:04 +0100 | <EvanR> | so there's a way to use it semilogically |
| 2025-03-12 05:54:37 +0100 | <EvanR> | that being said, the type class system always terminates if you don't enable any dark magic pragmas right |
| 2025-03-12 05:53:29 +0100 | <c_wraith> | inconsistent logics are nice because they let you prove anything, and so does Haskell |
| 2025-03-12 05:52:52 +0100 | <EvanR> | falso 9.6 |
| 2025-03-12 05:52:19 +0100 | <c_wraith> | pfft. It's a logic, it's just not a consistent one. |
| 2025-03-12 05:52:02 +0100 | <EvanR> | when someone said haskell is not a logic they weren't kidding |
| 2025-03-12 05:50:36 +0100 | peterbecich | (~Thunderbi@syn-047-229-123-186.res.spectrum.com) (Ping timeout: 276 seconds) |
| 2025-03-12 05:50:28 +0100 | <c_wraith> | I'm sure nothing bad could happen |
| 2025-03-12 05:49:58 +0100 | <EvanR> | now it's telling me the reduction stack size of 201 ran out, and instead of increasing it, to disable the check if I'm sure type checking will terminate |
| 2025-03-12 05:47:19 +0100 | merijn | (~merijn@host-vr.cgnat-g.v4.dfn.nl) (Ping timeout: 260 seconds) |
| 2025-03-12 05:46:55 +0100 | <euouae> | it's like those no-fault waivers |
| 2025-03-12 05:46:53 +0100 | alfiee | (~alfiee@user/alfiee) (Ping timeout: 244 seconds) |
| 2025-03-12 05:46:19 +0100 | <EvanR> | lol |
| 2025-03-12 05:46:16 +0100 | <c_wraith> | you should be getting nervous. |
| 2025-03-12 05:45:59 +0100 | <EvanR> | ghci told me to enable IncoherentInstances |
| 2025-03-12 05:45:44 +0100 | <EvanR> | I continued to try to troll ghc with some terrible overlapping instances |
| 2025-03-12 05:44:34 +0100 | <c_wraith> | On one hand, that's why the Show1 class exists. On the other, you can do it with UndecidableInstances and StandaloneDeriving. |
| 2025-03-12 05:43:32 +0100 | <c_wraith> | And in that case, the constraint is definitely larger than the instance head. |
| 2025-03-12 05:43:15 +0100 | <c_wraith> | A common way to end up needing UndecidableInstances without MPTCs or Overlapping is stuff like Fix. `newtype Fix f = Fix (f (Fix f))`. Attempting the automatic Show instance for that ends up with the compiler trying to write something like `instance Show (f (Fix f)) => Show (Fix f) ...` |
| 2025-03-12 05:42:45 +0100 | alfiee | (~alfiee@user/alfiee) alfiee |
| 2025-03-12 05:40:21 +0100 | <c_wraith> | when it was module level, it did just say "turn on this extension to allow this" |
| 2025-03-12 05:40:09 +0100 | <EvanR> | (and LANGUAGE OverlappingInstances is deprecated) |
| 2025-03-12 05:40:05 +0100 | <c_wraith> | I guess when overlapping was moved to a per-instance pragma, they decided not to advise turning it on |
| 2025-03-12 05:40:01 +0100 | merijn | (~merijn@host-vr.cgnat-g.v4.dfn.nl) merijn |
| 2025-03-12 05:39:42 +0100 | <EvanR> | but at least doesn't tell me to turn it on xD |
| 2025-03-12 05:39:37 +0100 | <EvanR> | GHC rejects my code because of overlapping instances |
| 2025-03-12 05:39:23 +0100 | <EvanR> | I tried it |
| 2025-03-12 05:35:46 +0100 | <euouae> | oh I see |
| 2025-03-12 05:35:09 +0100 | <EvanR> | ok nvm that |
| 2025-03-12 05:34:51 +0100 | <c_wraith> | and that's when things get fragile |
| 2025-03-12 05:34:45 +0100 | <c_wraith> | So then ghc is going to tell you to allow overlapping |
| 2025-03-12 05:34:37 +0100 | <c_wraith> | yeah, that example would trigger it, but that's not a problem. The problem is that that instance overlaps everything |
| 2025-03-12 05:34:32 +0100 | <EvanR> | does the implied kind expected by the hypothetical Foo class make sense there |
| 2025-03-12 05:34:24 +0100 | synchromesh | (~john@2406:5a00:24cf:bb00:98ab:59f5:dcb3:c8fc) synchromesh |
| 2025-03-12 05:34:04 +0100 | <euouae> | but I'm assuming you're saying that the more important/encountered issue is overlapping instances |