Phil Hazelden

@harelba gentle ping :) I see there's been some big changes, is this something you're in a position to look at now? (I confess I haven't actually checked if this...

#46 may help you. (It's apparently for 5.1, but I've been using something much like it for 6, so maybe 8 works too.) I don't fully understand why it was...

Indeed, it seems the postgres implementation is not consistent: https://github.com/array-analytics/plpg_hashids/issues/13

> From a bit of exploration, I think giving `Tuple2B a b` instances of `ApplicativeB`, `TraversableB` and `ConstraintsB` is enough. Oh, I now think these constraints are too weak if...

Quick update: I've now tried my actual codebase many times with `mapGenT`/`filterT`, and haven't yet hit an infinite shrink loop. It's conceivable I just haven't run into it (the same...

Looking at [the docs](https://ghc.gitlab.haskell.org/ghc/doc/users_guide/exts/pattern_synonyms.html)... I might be missing something, but I don't think so, unfortunately. What I think we want is for a way to use the `Command {...}` pattern...

Though, another possibility: add a `ToAction` class and have `Command` and `CommandA` be different data types. Presumably the class method would either replace the existing `action`, i.e. ```haskell class ToAction...

Thanks for your comment! I'm glad I'm not the only person thinking this would be useful. > In general, the shrink tree is created through user calls to `>>=` and...

Ah, for some context here, I have no existing relationship with this repository, I've opened another PR and a couple of issues but I haven't yet had any code accepted....

> I think it might be that the feature I implement in F# Hedgehog is strictly better than what you have implemented in this PR. However, I don't fully understand...