(... cont) Data.Set no Functor/Monad instance

[atravers]

…and comments like these:

@AntC2

Double doesn’t even satisfy reflexivity nor substitutivity, let alone extensionality. I’m not seeing good reasons why it’s in Eq. The core libraries have several less-than-fully Eq classes for comparisons.

now have me thinking about:

Eradicating unlawful Eq & Ord instances, crustacean style

I am exploring the concept of method-less typeclasses that would inherit from a superclass but signal more constraint on their subject. Rust does this™: For example, -- | Partial Equivalence Relation. -- The laws are Symmetry and Transitivity. class PartialEq a where (==), (/=) :: a -> a -> Bool x /= y = not (x == y) x == y = not (x /= y) -- | Total Equivalence Relation. -- Two more laws are brought in: -- * Reflexivity -- * (==) and (/=) are…

and:

Informal discussion about the progression of `base`

My Christmas wishlist: Vector readily available Text readily available A Display typeclass that is for user-facing output PartialEq & PartialOrd, superclasses of Eq & Ord. LinkedList as a type instead of brackets Bonus: Less arrogance in terms of development experience and more observations of what other languages that are usually disregarded do to improve the baseline levels of programming joy for their users.

along with my response to the latter:

Informal discussion about the progression of `base`

…well, that’s the end of the abstract monadic IO type - it has an implementation but no denotation. But I digress - from this older thread: this post by me; There are wishes, and then there are flights of fancy…