@Kha the new test may look exoteric, but it reflects an actual
instance in our code base, and the old frontend supports it.
Not sure whether we should keep it or not.
The compiler frontend implemented in C++ is eagerly inlining local
functions. The new test would take an absurd amount of time without
the new hack.
We remove this hack when we re-implement the compiler frontend in Lean.
@Kha `withReader` is a well-behaved version of `adaptReader`. `adaptReader` is
too general, and it often produces counterintuitive elaboration
errors.
Here are two super annoying issues I hit all the time:
1- `adaptReader` + polymorphic code
```
def ex1 : ReaderT Nat IO Unit :=
adaptReader (fun x => x + 1) $
IO.println "foo" -- 3 Errors here failed to synthesize `Monad ?m` and `MonadIO ?m`, and don't know how to synthesize `Type → Type`
```
2- `adaptReader` and notation that requires the expected type
```
structure Context :=
(x y : Nat)
def ex2 : ReaderT Context IO Nat :=
adaptReader (fun s => { s with x := 10 }) $ -- Error at the structure instance
...
```
In the example above, I have to write `fun (s : Context) => ...` to
fix the problem.
The two problems above happen in the old and new frontends. However,
there is a new problem specific for the new frontend. In the new
frontend, a `do` is only elaborated when the expected type is known.
So, `adaptReader (fun ctx => ...) do ...` seldom works :(
As I said above, the issue is that `adaptReader` is too general. Its
type is
```
{ρ ρ' : Type u_1} → {m m' : Type u_1 → Type u_2} → [MonadReaderAdapter ρ ρ' m m'] → {α : Type u_1} → (ρ' → ρ) → m α → m' α
```
`withReader` is a simpler version of `adaptReader`
```
withReader : {ρ : Type u_1} → {m : Type u_1 → Type u_2} → [MonadWithReader ρ m] → {α : Type u_1} → (ρ → ρ) → m α → m α
```
It doesn't have any of the problems above. Moreover, I managed to replace
every single instance of `adaptReader` with `withReader` at the stdlib
and tests. We don't need the `adaptReader` generality.
@Kha I did not implement support for reassignments and `continue`,
`break`, `return` inside the `finally` clause. It is doable, but it
feels like unnecessary complexity. We currently don't have any
instance in our code base where this would be useful.
