+A note about non-tyvar dictionaries
+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
+Some Ids have types like
+
+ forall a,b,c. Eq a -> Ord [a] -> tau
+
+This seems curious at first, because we usually only have dictionary
+args whose types are of the form (C a) where a is a type variable.
+But this doesn't hold for the functions arising from instance decls,
+which sometimes get arguements with types of form (C (T a)) for some
+type constructor T.
+
+Should we specialise wrt this compound-type dictionary? We used to say
+"no", saying:
+ "This is a heuristic judgement, as indeed is the fact that we
+ specialise wrt only dictionaries. We choose *not* to specialise
+ wrt compound dictionaries because at the moment the only place
+ they show up is in instance decls, where they are simply plugged
+ into a returned dictionary. So nothing is gained by specialising
+ wrt them."
+
+But it is simpler and more uniform to specialise wrt these dicts too;
+and in future GHC is likely to support full fledged type signatures
+like
+ f ;: Eq [(a,b)] => ...
+