MINIMAL XOR (Was: Proposal: Make Eq type class single method)
Henning Thielemann <[email protected]> Wed, 27 Oct 2021 12:38:47 +0200 (CEST)
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.lang.haskell.libraries |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On Mon, 25 Oct 2021, Carter Schonwald wrote: > i agree with Tom and Hecate,more strongly: > https://github.com/ghc/ghc/blob/98aa29d3fe447cce3407e6864b015892244bb475/libraries/ghc-prim/GHC/Classes.hs#L142-L150 > the current definition DOES NOT require defining both. > > as it currently stands, you only need to define one of '==' XOR '/=' > > this actually suggests an interesting and DIFFERENT ecosystem improvement, (ignoring IEEE non-signalling NANs), > namely we add support for XOR to minimal pragma syntax and issue a warning > > perhaps something like adding (XOR "reason String" clauseExpr1 clauseexpr2) ? The problem of implementing two methods in a contradictory way arises for any OR in MINIMAL pragma, right? _______________________________________________ Libraries mailing list [email protected] http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/libraries