I'm finding it hard to think of a case where (/=) would be any easier to define than (==).

On Wed, Oct 20, 2021 at 10:43 AM Tom Ellis <tom-lists-haskell-cafe-2017@jaguarpaw.co.uk> wrote:
On Wed, Oct 20, 2021 at 04:39:21PM +0200, Joachim Breitner wrote:
> I am revisiting some educational material about Haskell, and I stumble
> over something that I keep stumbling over. I thought there was prior
> discussion, but I couldn’t find it (operators hard hard to google for).
>
> Why does Eq have a (/=) method?

Perhaps sometimes it is easier to define (/=) and use the default
definition of (==) in terms of it?
_______________________________________________
Libraries mailing list
Libraries@haskell.org
http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/libraries


--
brandon s allbery kf8nh
allbery.b@gmail.com