Aaron Denney
Well, the way the report specifies that max's default definition is. I'd actually favor making that not an instance function at all, and instead have max and min be external functions.
If you permit a naïve question: Prelude> :i Ord class (Eq a) => Ord a where compare :: a -> a -> Ordering (<) :: a -> a -> Bool (>=) :: a -> a -> Bool (>) :: a -> a -> Bool (<=) :: a -> a -> Bool max :: a -> a -> a min :: a -> a -> a ..while all functions could be easily derived from 'compare'. Or from the Eq instance's (==) and (<), say. What is the reason for this? Efficiency? (Which couldn't be handled equally well by RULES?) Otherwise, it looks like an invitation for writing inconsistent instances. -k -- If I haven't seen further, it is by standing in the footprints of giants