precedence bug with derived instances

[Dean Herington]

Dean Herington wrote:

> On Tue, 29 Oct 2002, Christian Sievers wrote:
>
> > I guess "equivalent" just means equality without suggesting that the type is
> > an instance of Eq.  There are other places where the report uses == in
> > situations where you can't really apply it, for example, in D.2 it says
> > "we would have
> >         [Orange ..]         ==  [Orange, Yellow, Green]",
> > which is true, but we can't use this expresion and expect it to reduce to
> > True, because it is just not type correct.
>
> Why is that expression not type-correct?

[Answering my own question...]

Duh.  Because the type doesn't partake of Eq.

 -- Dean