Excerpts from Felipe Almeida Lessa's message of Sun Dec 04 08:06:36 -0500 2011: > Which ones? The Ord instance of 'Reverse (Reverse k)'s should be the > same as that of 'k', right? Other than that, what invariants could be > broken? Yes, Reverse (Reverse k)) should be functionally equal to k, but that's not what reverse' was doing, was it? ;-) Edward