Proposal: Num instance for (a -> b)

[Daniel Cartwright]

I'm not sure I would label it a bad decision, but the concerns here make
sense.

On Mon, Nov 12, 2018, 5:16 AM Jon Fairbairn <jon.fairbairn at cl.cam.ac.uk
wrote:

> Daniel Cartwright <chessai1996 at gmail.com> writes:
>
> > ANum seems to be just Data.Monoid.Ap.
> > Also, I can see not wanting to worsen the error messages, though it is
> > worth pointing out that we already have a Monoid instance with the same
> > semantics, and a similar potential for confusing error messages.
>
> The existence of a previous bad decision doesn’t seem to me to
> be a good reason to make another one.
>
> --
> Jón Fairbairn                                 Jon.Fairbairn at cl.cam.ac.uk
> http://www.chaos.org.uk/~jf/Stuff-I-dont-want.html  (updated 2014-04-05)
>
> _______________________________________________
> Libraries mailing list
> Libraries at haskell.org
> http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/libraries
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.haskell.org/pipermail/libraries/attachments/20181112/6f0708f9/attachment.html>