Skip to content
Hallway
0:00 / 0:00

#ghccore#systemf#simonpeytonjones

Into the Core Squeezing Haskell into nine Constructors - Simon Peyton Jones | ZuriHac 2022

OST – Ostschweizer Fachhochschule

3.4K subscribers • 11 videos on Hallway

YouTube
  • Recommended by 1 person: 1 in engineering communities.
  • Presented by Simon Peyton Jones, Honorary Professor at University of Glasgow

Advanced. Deep dive for people who know the field.

3.8K views4 years ago1 recommendation

Programming languagesSystems programmingHaskellCompilers and interpretersLanguage design and type systems

Simon Peyton Jones explains how GHC compiles the complex Haskell language down to an elegant core language of just nine constructors.

Simon Peyton Jones, from Epic Games, Honorary Professor at University of Glasgow, Honorary Distinguished Fellow of the Cambridge University Department of Computer Science and Technology Introduced by Jasper Van der Jeugt. zfoh.ch/zurihac2022/

Why it's here

1 person recommends this

What people say. Recommended for understanding Haskell's underlying type system and how GHC Core implements System F.

u/rhl120in r/haskell • Recommends

What type system does Haskell use? Hello, Haskell has inspired me to take a look at type theory. I started reading the book Type Theory and Formal Proof. The book explains several type systems such as **λ2, λω** and **λC** but none of them happen to capture all of Haskell's type system. They specifically miss the idea of type classes. That got me wondering what type system does Haskell use? Thanks! PS: I assumed here that Haskell is based on type theory. I have been told that several times. EDIT: The replies mentioned the following resources: - Into the core - squeezing Haskell into 9 constructors. Thanks to u/ryani - System FC as implemented in GHC. Thanks to u/uppercase_lambda
59View on Reddit

u/qu4ntumcpain r/functionalprogramming • Mentions

On “Is there functional programming simplifier or sanitizer that uses the no side effect phenomenon?”

the GHC (haskell compiler) performs optimizations that would be blocked by side effects. maybe you'd like to hear Simon Peyton Jones talk about it? link to this video
13View on Reddit

u/Syrakin r/haskell • Mentions

On “Instance derivation for variable tuple size?”

> Some controversial statement I'll take the bait. > it seems like it has a strong preference to complex generic solutions that cover 100% of cases I think of Haskell to be precisely the opposite of that. Generic programming is an outlier in terms of complexity, and it's far from achieving 100% generality at what it aims to do. It's really not a good representative of what people like about Haskell (and I say that as one who is completely nuts for generics). Pure functional programming is very much about doing more with less: no side effects, and the basic building blocks are functions, a math 101 concept. AFAIK all other languages in that space are either a dead ancestor of Haskell, or…
3View on Reddit

u/g__in r/haskell • Mentions

On “My take on haskell type classes”

…the user, so this cannot be implemented using only a fixed number of specialisations. It is true that type classes can be always translated away, but they won't always be specialized. In fact, most of the syntax can be translated away, and the entire Haskell on the value level can be squeezed to about 9 constructs (here are two talks about this: link to this video link to this video…
3View on Reddit

u/Axman6in r/haskell • Mentions

On “Interesting Haskell compiler optimizations?”

IIRC this talk by Simon Peyton-Jones does a good job explaining lots of the optimisations GHC can do because Haskell is pure: link to this video (if not, then I’ve never been able to find the video he did that talks about case-of-case, case-of-known-constructor etc.)
3View on Reddit