No, I've not tested against head. I'd not heard anything new about
that! That sounds exciting. Sorry about the noise if it's all finished
already.
David
On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 9:57 AM, Richard Eisenberg wrote:
> The Coercible solver has evolved steadily. It should know that (Coercible a b
> <=
The Coercible solver has evolved steadily. It should know that (Coercible a b
<=> Coercible b a). Do you have a concrete example of where it's not doing
this? Have you tested against HEAD?
Thanks,
Richard
On Oct 22, 2015, at 9:56 AM, David Feuer wrote:
> At present, any time we write a functi
At present, any time we write a function with a `Coercible`
constraint, we must take great care to choose `Coercible a b` or
`Coercible b a` depending on which will ultimately lead to fewer silly
conversions. This is particularly sad because the whole Coercible
mechanism guarantees that these have
