You're misreading the question. It's asking you to show that the category induced by the <= relation fails associativity if you add an extra morphism.
on https://en.wikibooks.org/w/index.php?title=Haskell/Category_theory&stable=0#Hask.2C_the_Haskell_category
the second exercise in the box (see illustration there) asks
"(Harder.) If we add another morphism to the above example, it fails to be a category. Why? Hint: think about associativity of the composition operation."
There are no answers-to-exercises. Can someone explain to me why adding another function with the same type causes the Haskell type system to no longer form the Hask category?
(scratching head)
_______________________________________________
Beginners mailing list
Beginners@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/beginners