@@ -161,6 +161,8 @@ have to think of more syntax and implement it.
> *RAE:* But that code will issue an "inaccessible code" error. I'm OK (but I don't love it) if the user has to write out bogus method definitions -- that's not what I'm worried about.
> *Lennart:* I don't understand how you can get an inaccessible code error, unless you perform a link-time check if all instances have actually been used. Since instances are always exported there is no module level check you can make to see if an instance is used.
1. Relatedly, when definition an instance with a `TypeError` constraint, what should users write in the body? Leaving it empty causes warnings, but anything written in there would never be called. *Lennart*: See above.
1. Do we support `foo :: TypeError (Text "") -> TypeError (Text ""); foo = id`? I don't have a strong feeling one way or the other, but it would be nice to have this specified. *Lennart*: I would expect this to result in a type error at some point. If, after typechecking, there are any residual `TypeError` occurrences in types then something has gone wrong.