On Wed, Dec 2, 2009 at 6:08 PM, Greg Fitzgerald <[email protected]> wrote:
> Gregory Crosswhite <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Out of curiosity, why would one want a "newtype" that were unwrapped 
>> implicitly, rather than just using "type"?
>
> One reason might be because you only switched from 'type' to 'newtype'
> so that you could write more refined Arbitrary instances for your
> QuickCheck tests.

Maybe that is an indication that we should use a checker combinator
library instead of typeclasses for automated testing.  Less
convenient, more adaptable.

Luke
_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe

Reply via email to