Unusual EqLaws definition
Open
Nobody has claimed this yet.
- Dominant language
- Scala
- Stars
- 5.5k
- Forks
- 1.2k
- Avg merge
- 2d 10h
- Merged PRs (30d)
- 5
Description
I found that EqLaws has an unusual definition:
Equivalency that I know doesn't have antisymmetry law, that is typically included in order.
I wonder where is the source of this kind of equivalency definition.
Contributor guide
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
Research direction
Start by reading kernel-laws/shared/src/main/scala/cats/kernel/laws/EqLaws.scala at lines 36-37 and the surrounding law definitions. Trace the rationale for including antisymmetry and compare it with the issue's stated equivalence definition. Done requires a maintainer-backed explanation or a decided correction, but the issue does not specify which change is wanted.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Tech stack
- scala
- Domain
- documentation
- Issue type
- Documentation
- Difficulty
- 4/5
- Estimated time
- 3-5 days
- Activity status
- Stale
- Clarity
- Needs clarification
- Newbie friendliness
- 25/100