I have a working code of this but for that I have to reimplement Arbitrary and Testable typeclasses which I don't want to do. I thought it might be possible to use parts of quickcheck without actually changing its code but still I am unable to find a suitable solution.

-Satvik

On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 2:58 PM, Roman Cheplyaka <roma@ro-che.info> wrote:
* Stephen Tetley <stephen.tetley@gmail.com> [2013-01-13 08:49:08+0000]
> In general you can't do this whether you use pats of QuickCheck or not
> - `randomEvalute` would need to inspect the supplied function to see
> how many input parameters it has so it can list them, but there is no
> such introspection in Haskell.

This can be done with relatively simple type class hackery. In fact,
QuickCheck already does that in order to generate arguments and print
them in case of failure.

Roman