Eq instance for (a,b,c,d,e) and upwards

[Ralf Hinze]

Henrik Nilsson wrote:

> So, if, in the interest of being conservative, the stated minimal
> bound cannot be "infinity", could it at least be a great deal
> bigger than what reasonably would be used in *hand-written*
> code? Say 15. An arbitrary choice, of course, but it is not
> excessive from an implementation perspective, yet large enough
> that I cannot imagine hand-written code getting close to the
> limit.

I second Henrik here, 15 is much better than 7.

Cheers, Ralf