Re: Make Eq type class single method
Brandon Allbery <[email protected]> Wed, 20 Oct 2021 10:48:51 -0400
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.lang.haskell.libraries |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <CAKFCL4Ut=5NGm2=oM+2p_aPRT0ao+S+Pp658te6CwhQsO-bWjg@mail.gmail.com> |
> > I'm finding it hard to think of a case where (/=) would be any easier to > define than (==). On Wed, Oct 20, 2021 at 10:43 AM Tom Ellis < [email protected]> wrote: > On Wed, Oct 20, 2021 at 04:39:21PM +0200, Joachim Breitner wrote: > > I am revisiting some educational material about Haskell, and I stumble > > over something that I keep stumbling over. I thought there was prior > > discussion, but I couldn’t find it (operators hard hard to google for). > > > > Why does Eq have a (/=) method? > > Perhaps sometimes it is easier to define (/=) and use the default > definition of (==) in terms of it? > _______________________________________________ > Libraries mailing list > [email protected] > http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/libraries > -- brandon s allbery kf8nh [email protected] _______________________________________________ Libraries mailing list [email protected] http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/libraries