On 12/22/11 2:28 PM, J. Garrett Morris wrote:
2011/12/22 Edward Kmett:
The change, however, was a deliberate _break_ with the standard that
passed through the library review process a few months ago, and is now
making its way out into the wild.
Is it reasonable to enquire how many standard-com
| 2011/12/22 Edward Kmett :
| > The change, however, was a deliberate _break_ with the standard that
| > passed through the library review process a few months ago, and is now
| > making its way out into the wild.
|
| Is it reasonable to enquire how many standard-compliant implementations
|
2011/12/22 Edward Kmett :
> The change, however, was a deliberate _break_ with the standard that
> passed through the library review process a few months ago, and is now
> making its way out into the wild.
Is it reasonable to enquire how many standard-compliant implementations
of Haskell there are
7.0.x agrees with the standard.
The change, however, was a deliberate _break_ with the standard that passed
through the library review process a few months ago, and is now making its way
out into the wild.
The simplest fix is to simply add an Eq or Show constraint to the few functions
that ne
пDear GHC team,
ghc-7.0.1 assumes that Integral includes Show, and
ghc-7.4.0.20111219 does not assume this.
Which one agrees with Haskell-2010 ?
Regards,
--
Sergei
mech...@botik.ru
___
Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list
Glasgow-hask
