# Closed world instances

### From HaskellWiki

By default, Haskell type classes use the open world assumption: It is possible to add instances for more and more types. Sometimes you need a type class with a restricted set of instances, that is, a closed world assumption. If the set of instances is restricted then you can do a complete case analysis of all types that inhabit the class. The reverse is also true: If you can do a complete case analysis on all instance types then you have a restricted set of instances. This is the key for declaring such a class. We only declare one method, namely the method for doing a complete case analysis.

## 1 Method

As an example we use type-level natural numbers. We want to define a class that only allows type-level natural numbers as instances. Here it is:

data Zero data Succ n class Nat n where switch :: f Zero -> (forall m. Nat m => f (Succ m)) -> f n instance Nat Zero where switch x _ = x instance Nat n => Nat (Succ n) where switch _ x = x

That's all. You will not be able to define more instances of Nat,

since you will not be able to implement theI do not need more methods in Nat,

since I can express everything by the type case analysis provided byI can implement any method on Nat types

using a newtype around the method which instantiates theThis also means that users of the Nat class can write new methods without extending the Nat class.

Here is an example of how to usetype family Add n m :: * type instance Add Zero m = m type instance Add (Succ n) m = Succ (Add n m) data Vec n a = Vec decons :: Vec (Succ n) a -> (a, Vec n a) cons :: a -> Vec n a -> Vec (Succ n) a newtype Append m a n = Append {runAppend :: Vec n a -> Vec m a -> Vec (Add n m) a} append :: Nat n => Vec n a -> Vec m a -> Vec (Add n m) a append = runAppend $ switch (Append $ \_empty x -> x) (Append $ \x y -> case decons x of (a,as) -> cons a (append as y))

## 2 Proofs

Since the set of class instances is restricted we can conduct proofs about types that are instances of the class. In the open world assumption it is not possible to conduct most proofs since every statement could be invalidated by new class instances. Here are some examples on commutativity and associativity:

newtype RightZeroForth a n = RightZeroForth {runRightZeroForth :: Vec (Add n Zero) a -> Vec n a} rightZeroForth :: (Nat n) => Vec (Add n Zero) a -> Vec n a rightZeroForth = runRightZeroForth $ switch (RightZeroForth id) (RightZeroForth $ \x -> case decons x of (y,ys) -> cons y $ rightZeroForth ys) newtype RightZeroBack a n = RightZeroBack {runRightZeroBack :: Vec n a -> Vec (Add n Zero) a} rightZeroBack :: (Nat n) => Vec n a -> Vec (Add n Zero) a rightZeroBack = runRightZeroBack $ switch (RightZeroBack id) (RightZeroBack $ \x -> case decons x of (y,ys) -> cons y $ rightZeroBack ys) data Forall n = Forall forallPred :: Forall (Succ n) -> Forall n forallPred Forall = Forall newtype RightSuccBack m a n = RightSuccBack {runRightSuccBack :: Forall n -> Forall m -> Vec (Succ (Add n m)) a -> Vec (Add n (Succ m)) a} {- Succ (Add (Succ n) m) -> Succ (Succ (Add n m)) -> Succ (Add n (Succ m)) -> Add (Succ n) (Succ m) -} rightSuccBack :: (Nat n) => Forall n -> Forall m -> Vec (Succ (Add n m)) a -> Vec (Add n (Succ m)) a rightSuccBack = runRightSuccBack $ switch (RightSuccBack $ const $ const id) (RightSuccBack $ \n m x -> case decons x of (y,ys) -> cons y $ rightSuccBack (forallPred n) m ys) newtype Commute m a n = Commute {runCommute :: Forall n -> Forall m -> Vec (Add n m) a -> Vec (Add m n) a} {- Add (Succ n) m -> Succ (Add n m) -> Succ (Add m n) -> Add m (Succ n) -} commute :: (Nat n, Nat m) => Forall n -> Forall m -> Vec (Add n m) a -> Vec (Add m n) a commute = runCommute $ switch (Commute $ const $ const rightZeroBack) (Commute $ \n m x -> case decons x of (y,ys) -> rightSuccBack m (forallPred n) $ cons y $ commute (forallPred n) m ys) newtype AssociateRight m k a n = AssociateRight {runAssociateRight :: Forall n -> Forall m -> Forall k -> Vec (Add n (Add m k)) a -> Vec (Add (Add n m) k) a} associateRight :: (Nat n, Nat m) => Forall n -> Forall m -> Forall k -> Vec (Add n (Add m k)) a -> Vec (Add (Add n m) k) a associateRight = runAssociateRight $ switch (AssociateRight $ const $ const $ const id) (AssociateRight $ \n m k x -> case decons x of (y,ys) -> cons y $ associateRight (forallPred n) m k ys) newtype AssociateLeft m k a n = AssociateLeft {runAssociateLeft :: Forall n -> Forall m -> Forall k -> Vec (Add (Add n m) k) a -> Vec (Add n (Add m k)) a} associateLeft :: (Nat n, Nat m) => Forall n -> Forall m -> Forall k -> Vec (Add (Add n m) k) a -> Vec (Add n (Add m k)) a associateLeft = runAssociateLeft $ switch (AssociateLeft $ const $ const $ const id) (AssociateLeft $ \n m k x -> case decons x of (y,ys) -> cons y $ associateLeft (forallPred n) m k ys)