Since there is no `foldl1'` class method to override, no structures have a specialised definition. Therefore, a "default" definition can be written outside the class …
I know, Viktor. I have already written a definition very similar to yours. I even said in my first message that the implementation is trivial. The question is whether I should accept that patching over deficiencies of `base` is normal.
P.S. FWIW, apologies if I am misreading the tone of your message, but it does sound "demanding" to me. GHC is a free community project …
This is exactly why I am still here. Even though I have seen good and worthy proposals drowned in endless pondering over minutiae. Do I want to help improve the common goods? Yes. Am I happy with how it has been going so far? No.
… with no large corporation invested in its development, all the contributors want to help users, but this is easier to help users who are considerate of those to would volunteer their time to help.
This is not about _«help»_. I am not asking for help. I have technical requirements from a certain library, here `base`. I made the maintainers aware of these requirements. I cannot force the maintainers to improve the library, the maintainers cannot cancel my requirement.