Mostly direct from Blodwen (some minor modifications to deal with new
way of going into a new scope in the elaborator as well as the usual
bits dealing with name lookup and Glued terms)
Like Idris 1, these are implicitly added on encountering a repeated name
or a non-constructor application. Unlike Idris 1 (and Blodwen) they are
checking by unification rather than matching (which means in particular
that function argument names can't be bound in dot patterns) which is
slightly less expressive, but better overall because matching is
potentially more error prone.
Slight change of plan: instead of having special names, add Lazy, Inf,
Delay and Force and keywords and elaborate them specially.
Correspondingly, add DelayCase for case trees. Given that implicit
laziness is important, it seems better to do it this way than constantly
check whether the name we're working with is important.
This turns out to make implicit laziness much easier, because the
unifier can flag whether it had to go under a 'Delayed' to succeed, and
report that back to the elaborator which can then insert the necessary
coercion.
This slows things down a bit because to find the holes and give them the
right multiplicities, we need to normalise all the arguments which might
have been metavariables. Maybe we should skip this if we're not using
anything linear, for efficiency?
As patterns are handled by deciding which side of the as is considered
'used'. In case blocks, that should be the variable name, but in general
it should be the pattern, so IAs now has a flag to say which one.
It's not quite there yet, though, because the treatment of 'as' patterns
isn't quite right and the slightly hacky approach we're taking might not
be the best. Rethinking now...
Works by running all possible elaborators and checking that exactly one
succeeds. Still to do: pruning the list of elaborators by target type,
dealing with 'UniqueDefault', checking that delaying on failure works as
it should.
When we encounter them, not that they're a binding as normal, but also
record the thing they expand to. Then bind as a PLet, and convert that
to a Let on the RHS so it has computational force. The case tree
compiler knows about as patterns, so they get compiled to use the
appropriate name on the rhs (rather than a let).
