Indeed. Abusing tuples for the writer monad was a bad idea in the first place. There is no need to drive a bad idea further to the bitter end. Another way to put it: Not everything that is mathematically consequential is good software engineering practice. On 2019-04-04 07:54, Henning Thielemann wrote:
On Thu, 4 Apr 2019, Bryan Richter wrote:
I also understand the consistency aesthetic, and I would support efforts to make it feasible. The onus to "write a patch", though, is on the side of people championing this aesthetic. :)
In Germany there is a law: If you damage environment in the course of a construction, you must compensate this somehow. E.g. if you fell a tree you must plant some new ones. Analogously, if you reduce type safety in a way then add compensation in another way. That is, I also think that it is the obligation of the instance proposers to also implement some instance warning. I would not be surprised if they find out this way that we have a case of YAGNI.