For Void and Either
This is because I ended up using them elsewhere, so why not include them in the stdlib.
Also expose left/rightInjective functions, as are used in the DecEq proofs.
In a 'Bind', normalise the result of the first action, rather than
quoting the HNF. This improves performance since the HNF could be quite
big when quoted back.
Ideally, we wouldn't have to quote and unquote here, and we can probably
achieve this by tinkering with the evaluator.
This has an unfortunate effect on the reflection002 test, in that the
"typed template Idris" example now evaluates too much. But, I think the
overall performance is too important for the primary motivation
behind elaborator reflection. I will return to this!
This didn't cause a problem before as it was likely just ignored by the C
function. According to Edwin the extra argument is a leftover from when this
was a pure scheme call.
The ports are rather straight forward and I have purposefully written
the documentation to be beginner friendly.
Note, I have diverged from Idris1 over the naming of the projection
functions to make them consistent with `Pair` and `DPair`.
Conditional variables with timeout in Chez didn't work, so changed to a
consistent meaning of the timeout (microseconds). Also fix linearity of
unsafePerformIO.
Following a fairly detailed discussion on slack, the feeling is
generally that it's better to have a single interface. While precision
is nice, it doesn't appear to buy us anything here. If that turns out to
be wrong, or limiting somehow, we can revisit it later. Also:
- it's easier for backend authors if the type of IO operations is
slightly less restrictive. For example, if it's in HasIO, that limits
alternative implementations, which might be awkward for some
alternative back ends.
- it's one less extra detail to learn. This is minor, but there needs to
be a clear advantage if there's more detail to learn.
- It is difficult to think of an underlying type that can't have a Monad
instance (I have personally never encountered one - if they turns out
to exist, again, we can revisit!)
