George Russell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Why are these illegal? I appreciate that they can't give useful information
> to the compiler, which knows the type already from the class, but in my
> opinion they are still useful to the maintainer, because they serve as
> a reminder of the type.
I think it would be even useful to the compiler when one has a
polymorphic recursion. ISTR occasions when I wasn't able to define
fmap directly (eg. for a nested datatype for lambda calculus terms),
but had to define another name for it with a polymorphic declaration,
then equate fmap to it in the instance declaration.
Cheers,
Peter
