Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Get rid of --large-indicies using higher levels #33

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
May 20, 2024

Conversation

ibbem
Copy link
Collaborator

@ibbem ibbem commented May 13, 2024

Agda disables the option --large-indicies by default because it can cause inconsistencies (especially with --forced-argument-recursion, which is enabled by default). Hence, it's better to disable it as well.

Unfortunately, MonadWriter cannot handle different Levels for the Value and the Result type. Hence, the ignore-value and return-value hack is required to shift the Levels as required.

There are still some cases in IndexedSet where the Levels could be generalized even more. I know of at least the Transitive laws. However, the standard library doesn't provide a Trans definition allowing different indices as for homogeneous transitivity. We don't need this generality yet, so I just left it out for now.

@ibbem ibbem force-pushed the no-large-indicies-by-level-generalization branch from 8fab9ea to 8a264c1 Compare May 20, 2024 21:01
Agda disables this option by default because it can cause
inconsistencies (especially with `--forced-argument-recursion`, which is
enabled by default). Hence, it's better to disable it as well.

Unfortunately, `MonadWriter` cannot handle different `Level`s for the
Value and the Result type. Hence, `ignore-value` and `return-value` hack
is required to shift the `Level`s as required.

There are still some cases in `IndexedSet` where the `Level`s could be
generalized even more. I know of at least the `Transitive` laws.
However, the standard library doesn't provide a `Trans` definition
allowing different indices as for homogeneous transitivity. We don't
need this generality yet, so I just left it out for now.
@ibbem ibbem force-pushed the no-large-indicies-by-level-generalization branch from 8a264c1 to bc95fea Compare May 20, 2024 21:12
@ibbem
Copy link
Collaborator Author

ibbem commented May 20, 2024

As discussed in our meeting, I will merge this now.

@ibbem ibbem merged commit 8087550 into develop May 20, 2024
1 check passed
@ibbem ibbem deleted the no-large-indicies-by-level-generalization branch May 20, 2024 21:22
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant