[Updated comments.
nad**20040616110841] {
hunk ./ChasingBottoms/ApproxShow.hs 22
-  -- | @'approxShowsPrec' n@ works like 'showsPrec' with the following
-  -- differences:
+  -- | The 'Data' instance of 'ApproxShow' makes sure that
+  -- @'approxShowsPrec' n@ behaves (more or less) like the derived
+  -- version of 'showsPrec', with the following differences:
hunk ./ChasingBottoms/ApproxShow.hs 32
+  -- 
hunk ./ChasingBottoms/ApproxShow.hs 46
---   A generic case treating ordinary data types plus tuples and functions.
---   Type specific extensions for lists and strings.
--- I doubt that it's possible to have a type specific extension that
--- works for all list types, though.
+--   A generic case treating ordinary data types
+--   Special cases (type specific extensions) for tuples, functions,
+--     lists and strings.
+-- I'm not sure if it's possible to have a type specific extension that
+-- works for, for instance, all list types, though. I guess that it
+-- would have to be monomorphic.
hunk ./ChasingBottoms/ApproxShow.hs 53
--- Anyway, I don't have time improving this right now. All tests are
--- OK, so this should be fine.
+-- Anyway, I don't have time improving this right now. All tests go
+-- through, so this should be fine.
hunk ./ChasingBottoms/ApproxShow.hs 114
-              -- Remove the surrounding parentheses for infix constructors.
-              -- No, don't do that, see the Q test case below. For
-              -- lists it would have been correct, though.
-showCon a      = showString -- . (if isInfix a then tail . init else id)
-                 $ conString $ toConstr a
+-- Some infix constructors seem to have parentheses around them in
+-- their conString representations. Maybe something should be done about
+-- that. See the Q test case below, and compare with ordinary lists.
+showCon a      = showString $ conString $ toConstr a
}