That and it prevents the obvious instance for Bool.<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, Sep 16, 2011 at 8:51 PM, John Meacham <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:john@repetae.net">john@repetae.net</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">I also really dislike that superclass of bits, there is no need for it.<br>
<font color="#888888"><br>
John<br>
</font><div><div></div><div class="h5"><br>
On Fri, Sep 16, 2011 at 5:12 AM, Henning Thielemann<br>
<<a href="mailto:lemming@henning-thielemann.de">lemming@henning-thielemann.de</a>> wrote:<br>
><br>
> On Fri, 16 Sep 2011, Herbert Valerio Riedel wrote:<br>
><br>
>> Just as a side note: I also dislike that the Data.Bits.Bits type-class<br>
>> has Num as its superclass; If I need something to be an instance of the<br>
>> Bits class for the bit-ops, I don't usually want to be forced to provide<br>
>> multiplication and addition operations as well...<br>
><br>
> Me too. For instance when working with flag sets like in [1], addition,<br>
> multiplication, absolute value, number literals make no sense.<br>
><br>
> [1] <a href="http://hackage.haskell.org/package/enumset" target="_blank">http://hackage.haskell.org/package/enumset</a><br>
><br>
> _______________________________________________<br>
> Libraries mailing list<br>
> <a href="mailto:Libraries@haskell.org">Libraries@haskell.org</a><br>
> <a href="http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/libraries" target="_blank">http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/libraries</a><br>
><br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Libraries mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Libraries@haskell.org">Libraries@haskell.org</a><br>
<a href="http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/libraries" target="_blank">http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/libraries</a><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br>