## Parametric PolymorphismEdit

Section goal = short, enables reader to read code (ParseP) with ∀ and use libraries (ST) without horror. Question Talk:Haskell/The_Curry-Howard_isomorphism#Polymorphic types would be solved by this section.

Link to the following paper: Luca Cardelli: On Understanding Types, Data Abstraction, and Polymorphism.

`forall a`

Edit

As you may know, a **polymorphic** function is a function that works for many different types. For instance,

```
length :: [a] -> Int
```

can calculate the length of any list, be it a string `String = [Char]`

or a list of integers `[Int]`

. The **type variable** `a`

indicates that `length`

accepts any element type. Other examples of polymorphic functions are

```
fst :: (a, b) -> a
snd :: (a, b) -> b
map :: (a -> b) -> [a] -> [b]
```

Type variables always **begin in lowercase** whereas concrete types like `Int`

or `String`

always start with an uppercase letter, that's how we can tell them apart.

There is a more **explicit** way to indicate that `a`

can be any type

```
length :: forall a. [a] -> Int
```

In other words, "for all types `a`

, the function `length`

takes a list of elements of type `a`

and returns an integer". You should think of the old signature as an abbreviation for the new one with the `forall`

^{[1]}. That is, the compiler will internally insert any missing `forall`

for you. Another example: the types signature for `fst`

is really a shorthand for

```
fst :: forall a. forall b. (a,b) -> a
```

or equivalently

```
fst :: forall a b. (a,b) -> a
```

Similarly, the type of `map`

is really

```
map :: forall a b. (a -> b) -> [a] -> [b]
```

The idea that something is applicable to every type or holds for everything is called **universal quantification**. In mathematical logic, the symbol ∀^{[2]} (an upside-down A, read as "forall") is commonly used for that, it is called the **universal quantifier**.

### Higher rank typesEdit

With explicit `forall`

, it now becomes possible to write functions that expect **polymorphic arguments**, like for instance

```
foo :: (forall a. a -> a) -> (Char,Bool)
foo f = (f 'c', f True)
```

Here, `f`

is a polymorphic function, it can be applied to anything. In particular, `foo`

can apply it to both the character `'c'`

and the boolean `True`

.

It is not possible to write a function like `foo`

in Haskell98, the type checker will complain that `f`

may only be applied to values of either the type `Char`

or the type `Bool`

and reject the definition. The closest we could come to the type signature of `foo`

would be

```
bar :: (a -> a) -> (Char, Bool)
```

which is the same as

```
bar :: forall a. ((a -> a) -> (Char, Bool))
```

But this is very different from `foo`

. The `forall`

at the outermost level means that `bar`

promises to work with any argument `f`

as long as `f`

has the shape `a -> a`

for some type `a`

unknown to `bar`

. Contrast this with `foo`

, where it's the argument `f`

who promises to be of shape `a -> a`

for all types `a`

at the same time , and it's `foo`

who makes use of that promise by choosing both `a = Char`

and `a = Bool`

.

Concerning nomenclature, simple polymorphic functions like `bar`

are said to have a rank-1 type while the type `foo`

is classified as **rank-2 type**. In general, a **rank-n type** is a function that has at least one rank-(n-1) argument but no arguments of any higher rank.

The theoretical basis for higher rank types is **System F**, also known as the second-order lambda calculus. We will detail it in the section System F in order to better understand the meaning of `forall`

and its placement like in `foo`

and `bar`

.

Haskell98 is based on the Hindley-Milner type system, which is a restriction of System F and does not support `forall`

and rank-2 types or types of even higher rank. You have to enable the `RankNTypes`

^{[3]} language extension to make use of the full power of System F.

But of course, there is a good reason that Haskell98 does not support higher rank types: type inference for the full System F is undecidable, the programmer would have to write down all type signatures. Thus, the early versions of Haskell have adopted the Hindley-Milner type system which only offers simple polymorphic function but enables complete type inference in return. Recent advances in research have reduced the burden of writing type signatures and made rank-n types practical in current Haskell compilers.

`runST`

Edit

For the practical Haskell programmer, the ST monad is probably the first example of a rank-2 type in the wild. Similar to the IO monad, it offers mutable references

```
newSTRef :: a -> ST s (STRef s a)
readSTRef :: STRef s a -> ST s a
writeSTRef :: STRef s a -> a -> ST s ()
```

and mutable arrays. The type variable `s`

represents the state that is being manipulated. But unlike IO, these stateful computations can be used in pure code. In particular, the function

```
runST :: (forall s. ST s a) -> a
```

sets up the initial state, runs the computation, discards the state and returns the result. As you can see, it has a rank-2 type. Why?

The point is that mutable references should be local to one `runST`

. For instance,

```
v = runST (newSTRef "abc")
foo = runST (readSTRef v)
```

is wrong because a mutable reference created in the context of one `runST`

is used again in a second `runST`

. In other words, the result type `a`

in `(forall s. ST s a) -> a`

may not be a reference like `STRef s String`

in the case of `v`

. But the rank-2 type guarantees exactly that! Because the argument must be polymorphic in `s`

, it has to return one and the same type `a`

for all states `s`

; the result `a`

may not depend on the state. Thus, the unwanted code snippet above contains a type error and the compiler will reject it.

You can find a more detailed explanation of the ST monad in the original paper Lazy functional state threads^{[4]}.

### ImpredicativityEdit

*predicative*= type variables instantiated to*monotypes*.*impredicative*= also*polytypes*. Example:`length [id :: forall a . a -> a]`

or`Just (id :: forall a. a -> a)`

. Subtly different from higher-rank.

- relation of polymorphic types by their generality, i.e. `isInstanceOf`.
- haskell-cafe: RankNTypes short explanation.

## System FEdit

Section goal = a little bit lambda calculus foundation to prevent brain damage from implicit type parameter passing.

- System F = Basis for all this ∀-stuff.
- Explicit type applications i.e.
`map Int (+1) [1,2,3]`

. ∀ similar to the function arrow ->. - Terms depend on types. Big Λ for type arguments, small λ for value arguments.

## ExamplesEdit

Section goal = enable reader to judge whether to use data structures with ∀ in his __own__ code.

- Church numerals, Encoding of arbitrary recursive types (positivity conditions):
`&forall x. (F x -> x) -> x`

- Continuations, Pattern-matching:
`maybe`

,`either`

and`foldr`

I.e. ∀ can be put to good use for implementing data types in Haskell.

## Other forms of PolymorphismEdit

Though we've talked about primarily parametric polymorphism so far, there are actually two predominant forms of polymorphism employed in various language systems:

**Ad-hoc Polymorphism**- where a function is capable of being applied to a finite number of types.**Parametric polymorphism**- where a function is capable of being applied to an infinite number of types.

In C++, ad-hoc polymorphism can be seen as equivalent to function overloading:

```
int square(int x);
float square(float x);
```

We can do something similar in Haskell using type classes:

```
class Square a where
square :: a -> a
instance Square Int where
square x = x * x
instance Square Float where
square x = x * x
```

The main thing to take away with ad-hoc polymorphism is there will always be types that the function cannot accept, though the number of types the function can accept may be infinite. Contrast this with parametric polymorphism, equivalent in C++ to template functions:

```
template <class T>
T id(T a) {
return a;
}
template <class A, class B>
A const_(A first, B second) {
return first;
}
template <class T>
int return10 (T a) {
return 10;
}
```

Which is equivalent to the following in Haskell:

```
id :: a -> a
id a = a
const :: a -> b -> a
const a _ = a
return10 :: a -> Int
return10 _ = 10
```

The main take-away with parametric polymorphism is that any type must be accepted as an input to the function, regardless of its return type.

Note, with both forms of polymorphism, it is not possible to have two identically named functions that differ only in their return type.

For example, the following C++ is not valid:

```
void square(int x);
int square(int x);
```

Nor the Haskell version:

```
class Square a where
square :: a -> a
instance Square Int where
square x = x*x
instance Square Int where
square x = ()
```

Since the compiler would have no way to determine which version to use given an arbitrary function call.

TODO = contrast polymorphism in OOP and stuff.

*subtyping*

## Free TheoremsEdit

Section goal = enable reader to come up with free theorems. no need to prove them, intuition is enough.

- free theorems for parametric polymorphism.

## Notes

- ↑ Note that the keyword
`forall`

is not part of the Haskell 98 standard, but any of the language extensions`ScopedTypeVariables`

,`Rank2Types`

or`RankNTypes`

will enable it in the compiler. A future Haskell standard will incorporate one of these. - ↑ The
`UnicodeSyntax`

extension allows you to use the symbol ∀ instead of the`forall`

keyword in your Haskell source code. - ↑ Or enable just
`Rank2Types`

if you only want to use rank-2 types - ↑ John Launchbury; Simon Peyton Jones (1994-??-??).
*Lazy functional state threads*. ACM Press". pp. 24-35. http://www.dcs.gla.ac.uk/fp/papers/lazy-functional-state-threads.ps.Z.

## See alsoEdit

- Luca Cardelli. On Understanding Types, Data Abstraction, and Polymorphism.

This page is a stub. You can help Haskell by expanding it. |