Barliman: Prototype of a smart text editor
<p><pre><code>    &gt; given a fully or mostly-specified definition of some function foo, Barliman will attempt to prove that a partially-specified test is consistent with, or inconsistent with, the definition of foo.
</code></pre>
I feel like this is what GHC (the Haskell compiler) does for me. Where the &quot;test&quot;, in this case, is the type definition. And there is no room for error here.<p>So it&#x27;s possible that this idea makes more sense for languages without a strong type system. In any case, trying to complete a partial function definition without looking at the native types of the language means you miss a lot of information, especially in the case of Haskell, where the types tell you so much, if not everything, you need to know about a function.