Users have complained that they don't understand the use of the Default typeclass. It's not actually complicated so this should be explained clearly!
Joseph Abrahamson writes: "[Default] gave me a lot of headaches—not with typechecking, but with documentation. It has a lot of instances due to all of the parameters and all of the default tuple instances which, overall, lead to a lot of documentation chasing. I'm personally not a huge fan of type-directed defaulting, I avoid data-default in my own code. I ended up as even less of a fan of it here as it adds so much type UI overhead."
There's clearly some big problem here, as Default was implemented to avoid UI overhead. We must explain the benefits clearly and help users avoid confusion.
tomjaguarpaw
commented
10 years ago
Users have complained that they don't understand the use of the
Defaulttypeclass. It's not actually complicated so this should be explained clearly!Joseph Abrahamson writes: "[
Default] gave me a lot of headaches—not with typechecking, but with documentation. It has a lot of instances due to all of the parameters and all of the default tuple instances which, overall, lead to a lot of documentation chasing. I'm personally not a huge fan of type-directed defaulting, I avoiddata-defaultin my own code. I ended up as even less of a fan of it here as it adds so much type UI overhead."There's clearly some big problem here, as
Defaultwas implemented to avoid UI overhead. We must explain the benefits clearly and help users avoid confusion.