> > I argued that (Num a, Ord a) makes most sense to me. > > You argued that (Integral a) was a conscious choice (something I > > don't remember but I'm sure you're right), and is the right one anyway. > > > > I'd be interested to know what others think. If there's any doubt, > > we'll stay with Integral. > > My view is that (n+k) patterns are evil, so it doesn't really matter > what we decide. :-) No, seriously, I'm a little worried about > widening the range of numeric types for which (n+k) patterns are > supposed to work. I can (just about) imagine wanting to use Rationals > in an (n+k) pattern, but Float and Double?
I dimly remember that the justification for having n+k was to allow inductive definitions, which only applies to Integral. I'd vote for keeping it as it is, too. Jón _______________________________________________ Haskell mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell
