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

Sean Leather leather at cs.uu.nl
Sat Aug 23 19:51:32 EDT 2008

Brandon S. Allbery wrote:

> 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?

Can you examples of both naive definitions and fast definitions of Nat? I'm

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.haskell.org/pipermail/libraries/attachments/20080824/bccd2b27/attachment.htm

More information about the Libraries mailing list