2020-05-20 13:23:04 +03:00
|
|
|
|
**************************
|
|
|
|
|
Frequently Asked Questions
|
|
|
|
|
**************************
|
|
|
|
|
|
2021-07-16 13:16:46 +03:00
|
|
|
|
What are the aims of the Idris project?
|
|
|
|
|
=======================================
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Idris aims to make advanced type-related programming techniques accessible to
|
|
|
|
|
software practitioners. An important philosophy that we follow is that
|
|
|
|
|
Idris *allows* software developers to express invariants of their data and
|
|
|
|
|
prove properties of programs, but will not *require* them to do so.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Many of the answers in this FAQ demonstrate this philosophy, and we always
|
|
|
|
|
bear this in mind when making language and library design decisions.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Idris is primarily a research project, led by Edwin Brady at the University
|
|
|
|
|
of St Andrews, and has benefited from SICSA (https://www.sicsa.ac.uk) and
|
|
|
|
|
EPSRC (https://www.epsrc.ac.uk/) funding. This does influence some design
|
|
|
|
|
choices and implementation priorities, and means that some things are not
|
|
|
|
|
as polished as we'd like. Nevertheless, we are still trying to make it as
|
|
|
|
|
widely usable as we can!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Where can I find libraries? Is there a package manager?
|
|
|
|
|
=======================================================
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
We don't yet have a package manager, but you can still find a source of
|
|
|
|
|
libraries on the wiki: https://github.com/idris-lang/Idris2/wiki/Libraries
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fortunately, the dependencies are currently not that complicated, but we'd
|
|
|
|
|
still like a package manager to help! There isn't an official one yet, but
|
|
|
|
|
two are in development:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* Inigo: https://github.com/idris-community/inigo
|
|
|
|
|
* sae: https://github.com/DoctorRyner/sae
|
|
|
|
|
|
2020-05-20 13:23:04 +03:00
|
|
|
|
Can Idris 2 compile itself?
|
|
|
|
|
===========================
|
|
|
|
|
|
2020-05-22 23:17:37 +03:00
|
|
|
|
Yes, Idris 2 is implemented in Idris 2. By default, it targets
|
|
|
|
|
`Chez Scheme <https://cisco.github.io/ChezScheme/>`_, so you can bootstrap
|
|
|
|
|
from the generated Scheme code, as described in Section :ref:`sect-starting`.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Why does Idris 2 target Scheme? Surely a dynamically typed target language is going to be slow?
|
|
|
|
|
===============================================================================================
|
|
|
|
|
|
2021-07-17 20:22:14 +03:00
|
|
|
|
You may be surprised at how fast Chez Scheme is! `Racket <https://download.racket-lang.org/>`_,
|
2020-05-22 23:17:37 +03:00
|
|
|
|
as an alternative target, also performs well. Both perform better than the
|
|
|
|
|
Idris 1 back end, which is written in C but has not had the decades of
|
|
|
|
|
engineering effort by run time system specialists that Chez and Racket have.
|
|
|
|
|
Chez Scheme also allows us to turn off run time checks, which we do.
|
|
|
|
|
|
2021-07-17 20:22:14 +03:00
|
|
|
|
As anecdotal evidence of the performance improvement, we compared the
|
|
|
|
|
performance of the Idris 2 runtime with the Idris 1 runtime, using a version of
|
|
|
|
|
the compiler built with the Chez runtime and the same version built with the
|
|
|
|
|
bootstrapping Idris 2. On a Dell XPS 13 running Ubuntu, with the versions of
|
|
|
|
|
23rd May 2020, the performance was:
|
2020-05-23 14:25:54 +03:00
|
|
|
|
|
2021-07-17 20:22:14 +03:00
|
|
|
|
* Idris 2 (with the Chez Scheme runtime) checked its own source in 93 seconds.
|
|
|
|
|
* The bootstrapping Idris 2 (compiled with Idris 1) checked the same source in 125s.
|
|
|
|
|
* Idris 1 checked the bootstrapping Idris 2's source (the same as the above,
|
2020-05-23 14:25:54 +03:00
|
|
|
|
but with minor variations due to the syntax changes) in 768 seconds.
|
|
|
|
|
|
2021-07-17 20:22:14 +03:00
|
|
|
|
Unfortunately we can't repeat this experiment with the latest version, since
|
|
|
|
|
the bootstrapping Idris 2 is no longer able to build the current version.
|
|
|
|
|
|
2020-05-22 23:17:37 +03:00
|
|
|
|
This is, nevertheless, not intended to be a long term solution, even if it
|
|
|
|
|
is a very convenient way to bootstrap.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Can Idris 2 generate Javascript? What about plug-in code generators?
|
|
|
|
|
====================================================================
|
|
|
|
|
|
2020-11-01 13:26:10 +03:00
|
|
|
|
Yes! A `JavaScript code generator <https://idris2.readthedocs.io/en/latest/backends/javascript.html>`_
|
2020-09-22 22:27:41 +03:00
|
|
|
|
is built in, and can target either the browser or NodeJS.
|
2020-05-22 23:17:37 +03:00
|
|
|
|
|
2020-12-30 00:52:04 +03:00
|
|
|
|
Like Idris 1, Idris 2
|
2020-09-22 22:27:41 +03:00
|
|
|
|
`supports plug-in code generation <https://idris2.readthedocs.io/en/latest/backends/custom.html>`_
|
|
|
|
|
to allow you to write a back end for the platform of your choice.
|
2020-05-22 23:17:37 +03:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
What are the main differences between Idris 1 and Idris 2?
|
|
|
|
|
==========================================================
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The most important difference is that Idris 2 explicitly represents *erasure*
|
|
|
|
|
in types, so that you can see at compile time which function and data type
|
|
|
|
|
arguments are erased, and which will be present at run time. You can see more
|
|
|
|
|
details in :ref:`sect-multiplicities`.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Idris 2 has significantly better type checking performance (perhaps even an
|
|
|
|
|
order of magnitude!) and generates significantly better code.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Also, being implemented in Idris, we've been able to take advantage of the
|
|
|
|
|
type system to remove some significant sources of bugs!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You can find more details in Section :ref:`updates-index`.
|
|
|
|
|
|
2021-01-13 19:31:20 +03:00
|
|
|
|
Why aren't there more linearity annotations in the library?
|
|
|
|
|
===========================================================
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In theory, now that Idris 2 is based on Quantitative Type Theory (see
|
2021-07-17 20:22:14 +03:00
|
|
|
|
Section :ref:`sect-multiplicities`), we can write more precise types in the
|
2021-01-13 19:31:20 +03:00
|
|
|
|
Prelude and Base libraries which give more precise usage information. We have
|
|
|
|
|
chosen not to do that (yet) however. Consider, for example, what would happen
|
|
|
|
|
if we did::
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
id : (1 _ : a) -> a
|
|
|
|
|
id x = x
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This is definitely correct, because ``x`` is used exactly once. However, we
|
|
|
|
|
also have::
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
map : (a -> b) -> List a -> List b
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
We can't guarantee that the function passed to ``map`` is linear in its
|
|
|
|
|
argument in general, and so we can no longer say ``map id xs`` since the
|
|
|
|
|
multiplicity of ``id`` doesn't match the multiplicity of the function passed
|
|
|
|
|
to ``map``.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Eventually, we hope to extend the core language with multiplicity polymorphism
|
|
|
|
|
which will help resolve these problems. Until then, we consider linearity an
|
|
|
|
|
experimental new feature in the type system, and therefore we follow the general
|
|
|
|
|
philosophy that if you don't want to use linearity, its presence mustn't
|
|
|
|
|
impact the way you write programs.
|
|
|
|
|
|
2020-12-30 00:52:04 +03:00
|
|
|
|
How do I get command history in the Idris2 REPL?
|
|
|
|
|
================================================
|
|
|
|
|
|
2021-07-17 20:22:14 +03:00
|
|
|
|
The Idris2 REPL does not support readline in the interest of
|
2020-12-30 00:52:04 +03:00
|
|
|
|
keeping dependencies minimal. A useful work around is to
|
|
|
|
|
install `rlwrap <https://linux.die.net/man/1/rlwrap>`_, this
|
|
|
|
|
utility provides command history simply by invoking the Idris2
|
|
|
|
|
repl as an argument to the utility ``rlwrap idris2``.
|
|
|
|
|
|
2021-07-16 13:16:46 +03:00
|
|
|
|
The goal, eventually, is to use the IDE mode or the Idris API as the basis of
|
|
|
|
|
an implementation of a sophisticated REPL, developed independently from the
|
|
|
|
|
Idris 2 core. As far as we know, nobody is yet working on this: if you're
|
|
|
|
|
interested, please get in touch and we can help you get started!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Why does Idris use eager evaluation rather than lazy?
|
|
|
|
|
=====================================================
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Idris uses eager evaluation for more predictable performance, in particular
|
|
|
|
|
because one of the longer term goals is to be able to write efficient and
|
|
|
|
|
verified low level code such as device drivers and network infrastructure.
|
|
|
|
|
Furthermore, the Idris type system allows us to state precisely the type
|
|
|
|
|
of each value, and therefore the run-time form of each value. In a lazy
|
|
|
|
|
language, consider a value of type ``Int``:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
.. code-block:: idris
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
thing : Int
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
What is the representation of ``thing`` at run-time? Is it a bit pattern
|
|
|
|
|
representing an integer, or is it a pointer to some code which will compute
|
|
|
|
|
an integer? In Idris, we have decided that we would like to make this
|
|
|
|
|
distinction precise, in the type:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
.. code-block:: idris
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
thing_val : Int
|
|
|
|
|
thing_comp : Lazy Int
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Here, it is clear from the type that ``thing_val`` is guaranteed to be a
|
|
|
|
|
concrete ``Int``, whereas ``thing_comp`` is a computation which will produce an
|
|
|
|
|
``Int``.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
How can I make lazy control structures?
|
|
|
|
|
=======================================
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You can make control structures using the special Lazy type. For
|
|
|
|
|
example, one way to implement a non-dependent ``if...then...else...``
|
|
|
|
|
would be via a function named ``ifThenElse``:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
.. code-block:: idris
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ifThenElse : Bool -> (t : Lazy a) -> (e : Lazy a) -> a
|
|
|
|
|
ifThenElse True t e = t
|
|
|
|
|
ifThenElse False t e = e
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The type ``Lazy a`` for ``t`` and ``e`` indicates that those arguments will
|
|
|
|
|
only be evaluated if they are used, that is, they are evaluated lazily.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
By the way: we don't actually implement ``if...then...else...`` this way in
|
|
|
|
|
Idris 2! Rather, it is transformed to a ``case`` expression which allows
|
|
|
|
|
dependent ``if``.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Evaluation at the REPL doesn't behave as I expect. What's going on?
|
|
|
|
|
===================================================================
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Being a fully dependently typed language, Idris has two phases where it
|
|
|
|
|
evaluates things, compile-time and run-time. At compile-time it will only
|
|
|
|
|
evaluate things which it knows to be total (i.e. terminating and covering all
|
|
|
|
|
possible inputs) in order to keep type checking decidable. The compile-time
|
|
|
|
|
evaluator is part of the Idris kernel, and is implemented as an interpreter
|
|
|
|
|
in Idris. Since everything is known to have a normal form here, the evaluation
|
|
|
|
|
strategy doesn't actually matter because either way it will get the same
|
|
|
|
|
answer! In practice, it uses call by name, since this avoids evaluating
|
|
|
|
|
sub-expressions which are not needed for type checking.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The REPL, for convenience, uses the compile-time notion of evaluation. As well
|
|
|
|
|
as being easier to implement (because we have the evaluator available) this can
|
|
|
|
|
be very useful to show how terms evaluate in the type checker. So you can see
|
|
|
|
|
the difference between:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
.. code-block:: idris
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Main> \n, m => S n + m
|
|
|
|
|
\n, m => S (plus n m)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Main> \n, m => n + S m
|
|
|
|
|
\n, m => plus n (S m)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
If you want to compile and execute an expression at the REPL, you can use
|
|
|
|
|
the ``:exec`` command. In this case, the expression must have type ``IO a``
|
|
|
|
|
(for any ``a``, although it won't print the result).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Why can't I use a function with no arguments in a type?
|
|
|
|
|
=======================================================
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
If you use a name in a type which begins with a lower case letter, and which is
|
|
|
|
|
not applied to any arguments, then Idris will treat it as an implicitly
|
|
|
|
|
bound argument. For example:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
.. code-block:: idris
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
append : Vect n ty -> Vect m ty -> Vect (n + m) ty
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Here, ``n``, ``m``, and ``ty`` are implicitly bound. This rule applies even
|
|
|
|
|
if there are functions defined elsewhere with any of these names. For example,
|
|
|
|
|
you may also have:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
.. code-block:: idris
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ty : Type
|
|
|
|
|
ty = String
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Even in this case, ``ty`` is still considered implicitly bound in the definition
|
|
|
|
|
of ``append``, rather than making the type of ``append`` equivalent to...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
.. code-block:: idris
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
append : Vect n String -> Vect m String -> Vect (n + m) String
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
...which is probably not what was intended! The reason for this rule is so
|
|
|
|
|
that it is clear just from looking at the type of ``append``, and no other
|
|
|
|
|
context, what the implicitly bound names are.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
If you want to use an unapplied name in a type, you have three options. You
|
|
|
|
|
can either explicitly qualify it, for example, if ``ty`` is defined in the
|
|
|
|
|
namespace ``Main`` you can do the following:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
.. code-block:: idris
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
append : Vect n Main.ty -> Vect m Main.ty -> Vect (n + m) Main.ty
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Alternatively, you can use a name which does not begin with a lower case
|
|
|
|
|
letter, which will never be implicitly bound:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
.. code-block:: idris
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ty : Type
|
|
|
|
|
Ty = String
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
append : Vect n Ty -> Vect m Ty -> Vect (n + m) Ty
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As a convention, if a name is intended to be used as a type synonym, it is
|
|
|
|
|
best for it to begin with a capital letter to avoid this restriction.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Finally, you can turn off the automatic binding of implicits with the
|
|
|
|
|
directive:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
.. code-block:: idris
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
%auto_implicits off
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In this case, you can bind ``n`` and ``m`` as implicits, but not ``ty``,
|
|
|
|
|
as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
.. code-block:: idris
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
append : forall n, m . Vect n ty -> Vect m ty -> Vect (n + m) ty
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Why don't the ``Functor``, ``Applicative``, ``Monad`` and other interfaces include the laws?
|
|
|
|
|
============================================================================================
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On the face of it, this sounds like a good idea, because the type system allows
|
|
|
|
|
us to specify the laws. We don't do this in the prelude, though, for two
|
|
|
|
|
main reasons:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* It goes against the philosophy (above) that Idris *allows* programmers to
|
|
|
|
|
prove properties of their programs, but does not *require* it.
|
|
|
|
|
* A valid, lawful, implementation may not necessarily be provably lawful
|
|
|
|
|
within the Idris system, especially if it involves higher order functions.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
There are verified versions of the interfaces in ``Control.Algebra``, which
|
|
|
|
|
extend interfaces with laws.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I have an obviously terminating program, but Idris says it possibly isn't total. Why is that?
|
|
|
|
|
=============================================================================================
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Idris can't decide in general whether a program is terminating due to
|
|
|
|
|
the undecidability of the `Halting Problem
|
|
|
|
|
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halting_problem>`_. It is possible, however,
|
|
|
|
|
to identify some programs which are definitely terminating. Idris does this
|
|
|
|
|
using "size change termination" which looks for recursive paths from a
|
|
|
|
|
function back to itself. On such a path, there must be at least one
|
|
|
|
|
argument which converges to a base case.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- Mutually recursive functions are supported
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- However, all functions on the path must be fully applied. In particular,
|
|
|
|
|
higher order applications are not supported
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- Idris identifies arguments which converge to a base case by looking for
|
|
|
|
|
recursive calls to syntactically smaller arguments of inputs. e.g.
|
|
|
|
|
``k`` is syntactically smaller than ``S (S k)`` because ``k`` is a
|
|
|
|
|
subterm of ``S (S k)``, but ``(k, k)`` is
|
|
|
|
|
not syntactically smaller than ``(S k, S k)``.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
If you have a function which you believe to be terminating, but Idris does
|
|
|
|
|
not, you can either restructure the program, or use the ``assert_total``
|
|
|
|
|
function.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Does Idris have universe polymorphism? What is the type of ``Type``?
|
|
|
|
|
====================================================================
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Idris 2 currently implements ``Type : Type``. Don't worry, this will not be the
|
|
|
|
|
case forever! For Idris 1, the FAQ answered this question as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rather than universe polymorphism, Idris has a cumulative hierarchy of
|
|
|
|
|
universes; ``Type : Type 1``, ``Type 1 : Type 2``, etc.
|
|
|
|
|
Cumulativity means that if ``x : Type n`` and ``n <= m``, then
|
|
|
|
|
``x : Type m``. Universe levels are always inferred by Idris, and
|
|
|
|
|
cannot be specified explicitly. The REPL command ``:type Type 1`` will
|
|
|
|
|
result in an error, as will attempting to specify the universe level
|
|
|
|
|
of any type.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
What does the name “Idris” mean?
|
|
|
|
|
================================
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
British people of a certain age may be familiar with this
|
|
|
|
|
`singing dragon <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G5ZMNyscPcg>`_. If
|
|
|
|
|
that doesn’t help, maybe you can invent a suitable acronym :-) .
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Where can I find the community standards for the Idris community?
|
|
|
|
|
==================================================================
|
2021-01-13 19:31:20 +03:00
|
|
|
|
|
2021-07-16 13:16:46 +03:00
|
|
|
|
The Idris Community Standards are stated `here
|
2021-07-17 20:22:14 +03:00
|
|
|
|
<https://www.idris-lang.org/pages/community-standards.html>`_
|
2020-05-22 23:17:37 +03:00
|
|
|
|
|