Given this context:
open import IO
open import Data.String
open import Data.Unit
open import Coinduction
postulate
A : Set
f : String → A
g₁ g₂ : A → String
let's say I want to implement something like
foo : IO ⊤
foo = ♯ readFiniteFile "input.txt" >>= \s →
♯ (♯ putStrLn (g₁ (f s)) >>
♯ putStrLn (g₂ (f s)))
by let
-binding the intermediate result f s
. I was hoping this would work:
foo₁ : IO ⊤
foo₁ = ♯ readFiniteFile "input.txt" >>= \s →
let x = f s in
♯ (♯ putStrLn (g₁ x) >>
♯ putStrLn (g₂ x))
but this fails with
Not implemented: coinductive constructor in the scope of a let-bound variable
so I tried moving out the ♯
:
foo₂ : IO ⊤
foo₂ = ♯ readFiniteFile "input.txt" >>= \s →
♯ (let x = f s in
♯ putStrLn (g₁ x) >>
♯ putStrLn (g₂ x))
same problem as before.
I managed to get around this by just lifting out the ♯
ening step:
_>>′_ : ∀ {a} {A B : Set a} → IO A → IO B → IO B
m >>′ m′ = ♯ m >> ♯ m′
foo₂ : IO ⊤
foo₂ = ♯ readFiniteFile "input.txt" >>= \s →
♯ let x = f s in
putStrLn (g₁ x) >>′ putStrLn (g₂ x)
but why does that work if the "inlined" version doesn't?
FYI, this problem was a long standing one and as I was having a look at it today, I noticed that it had been fixed just a few days before you asked your question. The fix is part of the currently released version (version 2.5.1.1).