[elm-discuss] Re: Function equality again

Okay. I'm shutting up here and just tacking this onto https://github.com/elm-lang/elm-compiler/issues/1145. On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 4:15 PM, Mark Hamburg wrote: > Here is a very simple failure case that shows that comparing tasks isn't > necessarily safe (though it does

[elm-discuss] Re: Function equality again

Here is a very simple failure case that shows that comparing tasks isn't necessarily safe (though it does succeed if I create two success tasks): import Html exposing (..) import Http task1 = Http.getString "http://somewhere; task2 = Http.getString "http://somewhere; main = text <| if task1

Re: [elm-discuss] Re: Function equality again

I gather there has been trepidation about implementing an equatable built in "type class" akin to the existing "comparable", but I agree that if the plan is never to support function comparison, then equatable seems to be necessary if Elm is to live up to its "no runtime errors" goal. As for

[elm-discuss] Re: Function equality again

I also think that comparing functions should just compare them by reference, this should cover the most common cases. Another possible solution: What about a compile time error? Is this possible? On Wednesday, 12 October 2016 18:48:12 UTC+2, Mark Hamburg wrote: > > As discussed elsewhere, the

[elm-discuss] Re: Function equality again

I basically agree - something as basic as using an equality test should not have any chance to cause a runtime error in any case; in the case of functions it should be based on referential equality, which I think does the right thing in any sane case. On Wednesday, 12 October 2016 17:48:12

[elm-discuss] Re: Function equality again

So what's the specific case where you need to verify function reference equality? I suspect that needing this is a symptom of some other problem. On Wednesday, October 12, 2016 at 11:48:12 AM UTC-5, Mark Hamburg wrote: > > As discussed elsewhere, the runtime exception related to function