Ord methods are surprisingly strict

[Sven Panne]

Am Do., 7. Mai 2020 um 15:26 Uhr schrieb David Feuer <david.feuer at gmail.com
>:

> I believe this is all about strictness analysis. If these were lazy, then
> users would have to be very careful to force the lazy arguments when they
> don't need that laziness to avoid building unnecessary thunks.
>

This argument holds basically for every potentially lazy function, and I
fail to see why comparisons should be special, so this is not really
convincing. :-) We have easy ways to make things more strict, but not the
other way around.

In any case, it has historically been the case that the reference
implementations in the Haskell language/library report define the
strictness of the defined functions, too. Otherwise things could be very
surprising, in both ways (too lazy, too strict). Furthermore, the report is
*very* explicit about the derived instances:
https://www.haskell.org/onlinereport/haskell2010/haskellch11.html#x18-18300011.1
And
(), Bool, ... are defined via deriving:
https://www.haskell.org/onlinereport/haskell2010/haskellch9.html#x16-1710009
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.haskell.org/pipermail/libraries/attachments/20200507/317d5fb0/attachment.html>