我如何'说服'GHC我已经排除了某个案例？

Question

I have the following toy implementation of a non-empty list ( NEList ) datatype:

-- A type to describe whether or not a list is empty.
data Emptiness :: Type where
  Empty    :: Emptiness
  NotEmpty :: Emptiness

-- The list itself. Note the existential type in `Cons'.
data List :: Emptiness -> Type -> Type where
  Nil :: List 'Empty a
  Cons :: a -> List e a -> List 'NotEmpty a

type EList a = List 'Empty a
type NEList a = List 'NotEmpty a

For example it's very easy to define a 'safe head' function that only operates on non-empty lists:

eHead :: NEList a -> a
eHead (Cons a _) = a

The last is similarly easy, but has a little complication:

eLast :: NEList a -> a
eLast (Cons a Nil) = a
eLast (Cons _ ) = eLast b

The reason the pattern needs to be like this is to convince GHC that the type of b is indeed List 'NotEmpty , instead of an unknown existential type. The following code fails for that reason: ( Couldn't match type 'e' with ''NotEmpty' ... )

eLast :: NEList a -> a
eLast (Cons a Nil) = a
eLast (Cons _ ) = eLast b

I'm fully aware why this is happening. What I'd like to know is, can I avoid having to write b@(Cons _ _) every time? Is there some other way I can restrict the type, so that GHC knows that b is referring strictly to something of type List 'NotEmpty ?

One obvious way is to use unsafeCoerce but this defeats the point of the exercise.

---

For the sake of reproducibility, here is my preamble:

 {-# OPTIONS_GHC -Wall -Werror #-} -- To prevent missed cases. {-# LANGUAGE DataKinds #-} {-# LANGUAGE GADTs #-} {-# LANGUAGE KindSignatures #-} import Data.Kind 

Answer 1

One thing you can do is pass around an alternative for empty lists:

lastDef :: a -> List e a -> a
lastDef a Nil = a
lastDef _ (Cons a b) = lastDef a b

Then wrap it up once at the top level.

last :: NEList a -> a
last (Cons a b) = lastDef a b

Extending this pattern to foldr and foldr1 is left as an exercise for the reader.

Answer 2

You've "defined" NEList (I say that in a loose way) the same way base defines NonEmpty : as a single element tacked onto the head of a potentially empty list.

data NonEmpty a = a :| [a]

Another presentation of NonEmpty instead places that single element at the end.

data NonEmpty a = Single a | Multiple a (NonEmpty a)

This presentation, no surprise, makes eLast easy:

eLast (Single x) = x
eLast (Multiple _ xs) = eLast xs

Whenever you want multiple sets of constructors on the same type, look to pattern synonyms. Instead of the base NonEmpty , we can also translate to your List .

pattern Single :: forall e a. () => e ~ 'NotEmpty => a -> List e a
pattern Single x = Cons x Nil
pattern Multiple :: forall e a. () => e ~ 'NotEmpty => a -> List 'NotEmpty a -> List e a
pattern Multiple x xs <- Cons x xs@(Cons _ _)
  where Multiple x xs = Cons x xs
-- my dormant bidirectional pattern synonyms GHC proposal would allow just
-- pattern Multiple x (Cons y xs) = Cons x (Cons y xs)
-- but current pattern synonyms are a little stupid, so Multiple is ugly
{-# COMPLETE Nil, Single, Multiple :: List #-}
-- Single and Multiple are actually patterns on List e a, not List NotEmpty a
-- Therefore the COMPLETE must include Nil, or else we'd show that all
-- Lists are nonempty (\case { Single _ -> Refl; Multiple _ _ -> Refl })
-- They are, however, still complete on List NotEmpty a
-- GHC will "infer" this by "trying" the Nil constructor and deeming it impossible

Giving

eLast :: NEList a -> a
eLast (Single x) = x
eLast (Multiple _ xs) = eLast xs