2533: Generic functions that take integral arguments should work the same way as their prelude counterparts

[Brandon S. Allbery KF8NH]

On 2008 Aug 23, at 15:46, Gwern Branwen wrote:
> I've actually long wondered about this: why don't more functions use  
> Nat where it'd make sense? It can't be because Nat is hard to define  
> - I'd swear I've seen many definitions of Nat (if not dozens when  
> you count all the type-level exercises which include one).


Because naive definitions are dog-slow and fast definitions are  
anything but easy to use?

-- 
brandon s. allbery [solaris,freebsd,perl,pugs,haskell] allbery at kf8nh.com
system administrator [openafs,heimdal,too many hats] allbery at ece.cmu.edu
electrical and computer engineering, carnegie mellon university    KF8NH