问题
The book Type Driven Development with Idris presents this exercise:
Define a possible method that fits the signature:
two : (xs : Vect n elem) -> Vect (n * 2) elem
I tried:
two : (xs : Vect n elem) -> Vect (n * 2) elem
two xs = xs ++ xs
But I got the following error:
*One> :r
Type checking ./One.idr
One.idr:9:5:When checking right hand side of two:
Type mismatch between
Vect (n + n) elem (Type of xs ++ xs)
and
Vect (mult n 2) elem (Expected type)
Specifically:
Type mismatch between
plus n n
and
mult n 2
Holes: Hw1.two
If I have a Vector of size N, and need a Vector of size N*2, then appending it to itself seems reasonable.
What am I doing wrong?
回答1:
Short answer
Change the type signature to two : (xs : Vect n elem) -> Vect (n + n) elem
.
If you really need it that way
Getting to Vect (n * 2) elem
is a bit complicated. Here:
two' : Vect n elem -> Vect (n * 2) elem
two' {n} xs = rewrite multCommutative n 2 in rewrite plusZeroRightNeutral n in xs ++ xs
The reason you got that error message is that equality in typechecking is equality after reduction to normal form. n + n
and mult n 2
are equal, but their normal forms aren't. (mult n 2
is what n * 2
reduces to after resolving the typeclass.)
You can see the definition of mult
like so:
*kevinmeredith> :printdef mult
mult : Nat -> Nat -> Nat
mult 0 right = 0
mult (S left) right = plus right (mult left right)
It works by pattern matching on the first argument. Since the first argument in the type signature of two
is n
, mult
can't be reduced at all. multCommutative
will help us flip it around:
*kevinmeredith> :t multCommutative
multCommutative : (left : Nat) ->
(right : Nat) -> left * right = right * left
Our best tool to apply that equality is rewrite
, like in my definition of two'
. (run :t replace
at the REPL if you want to see how to do it the hard way) In the rewrite foo in bar
construction, foo
is something of type a = b
and bar
has the type of the outer expression, but with all a
s replaced by b
s. In my two'
above, I first used it to change Vect (n * 2)
to Vect (2 * n)
. This lets mult
reduce. If we look at mult
above, and apply it to 2
i.e. S (S Z)
and n
, you get plus n (mult (S Z) n
, and then plus n (plus n (mult Z n))
, and then plus n (plus n Z)
. You don't have to work out the reduction yourself, you can just apply the rewrite and put a hole on the end:
two' : Vect n elem -> Vect (n * 2) elem
two' {n} xs = rewrite multCommutative n 2 in ?aaa
Then ask Idris:
*kevinmeredith> :t aaa
elem : Type
n : Nat
xs : Vect n elem
_rewrite_rule : plus n (plus n 0) = mult n 2
--------------------------------------
aaa : Vect (plus n (plus n 0)) elem
plus n Z
doesn't reduce because plus
is defined by recursion on its first argument, just like mult
. plusZeroRightNeutral
gets you the equality you need:
*kevinmeredith> :t plusZeroRightNeutral
plusZeroRightNeutral : (left : Nat) -> left + 0 = left
I used the same technique with rewrite
again.
:search
will let you search the library for inhabitants of a given type. You'll often find someone has done the work of proving things for you.
*kevinmeredith> :s (n : Nat) -> n + 0 = n
= Prelude.Nat.multOneLeftNeutral : (right : Nat) ->
fromInteger 1 * right = right
= Prelude.Nat.plusZeroRightNeutral : (left : Nat) ->
left + fromInteger 0 = left
*kevinmeredith> :s (n, m : Nat) -> n * m = m * n
= Prelude.Nat.multCommutative : (left : Nat) ->
(right : Nat) -> left * right = right * left
(This answer is for Idris version 0.9.20.1)
来源:https://stackoverflow.com/questions/33839427/xs-vect-n-elem-vect-n-2-elem