This seems very, very wrong. The missing instance(s) might be left out
because of some good reason (e.g. if you have implemented sets with list and
not provided Ord).
On Nov 21, 2007 12:59 AM, Duncan Coutts [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, 2007-11-20 at 19:18 -0500, Alex Jacobson wrote:
When
On Tue, 2007-11-20 at 19:18 -0500, Alex Jacobson wrote:
When you want automated deriving of show/read etc., you need all the
components of your type also to be instances of show/read but you won't
want to *require* them to be automatically generated verions.
Standalone deriving does the
duncan.coutts:
On Tue, 2007-11-20 at 19:18 -0500, Alex Jacobson wrote:
When you want automated deriving of show/read etc., you need all the
components of your type also to be instances of show/read but you won't
want to *require* them to be automatically generated verions.
Standalone
