Join GitHub today
GitHub is home to over 28 million developers working together to host and review code, manage projects, and build software together.
Sign up"more flexibility for comparable types" #1008
Comments
This was referenced Aug 5, 2015
Closed
Apanatshka
referenced this issue
Aug 7, 2015
Closed
built-in typeclasses don't get replaced by the actual type like normal type variables #1013
evancz
added
the
meta
label
Sep 24, 2015
evancz
changed the title from
Aggregated issues: "more flexibility for comparable types"
to
"more flexibility for comparable types"
Oct 5, 2015
jvoigtlaender
referenced this issue
Nov 16, 2015
Closed
No way to put self-made types into the Set #1169
jvoigtlaender
referenced this issue
Feb 11, 2016
Closed
Unable to implement `a -> ExtendedRecord a` (aka: an argument for typeclasses or against extensible records) #1283
evancz
added
the
types
label
May 13, 2016
elm
locked and limited conversation to collaborators
Sep 21, 2016
Sign up for free
to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
evancz commentedAug 5, 2015
•
edited
Edited 1 time
-
evancz
edited Sep 21, 2016 (most recent)
If you want to add something to this, open a separate issue. If it is relevant, the resolution will be that it is added here.
There are a number of issues open about wanting
comparabletypes to be more flexible in various ways. This issue aggregates them all in one place so we can see what things folks want in particular.