According to the Report: nubBy :: (a -> a -> Bool) -> [a] -> [a] nubBy eq [] = [] nubBy eq (x:xs) = x : nubBy eq (filter (\y -> not (eq x y)) xs) Hence, we should have that nubBy (<) (1:2:[]) = 1 : nubBy (<) (filter (\y -> not (1 < y)) (2:[])) = 1 : nubBy (<) [] = 1 : [] However in ghc-6.10.3: Prelude Data.List> nubBy (<) [1,2] [1,2] The order of the parameters to the function which is passed to nubBy is *important* since the function might not be an equivalence relation. nubBy is more generally useful for sieving even when the relation is not symmetric. groupBy, for a similar reason, has applications for grouping beyond those provided by equivalence relations, and I think we should be able to rely on its behaviour. Moreover, I contend that the Report's order is more sensible, since the parameters to the relation stay in the left-to-right order in which they occurred in the list. It would be good if this could get fixed for 6.10.4. - Cale PS: There is actually another implementation of groupBy which would *also* be useful to have, but which is exactly the same for equivalence relations as groupBy, and it compares adjacent elements rather than the first element of a group with successive ones. (groupByAdjacent or something would be a reasonable name.) An implementation of it can be found here: http://hpaste.org/fastcgi/hpaste.fcgi/view?id=5595