Add Ord1 instances for Binding, NExprF, and NKeyName

[sjakobi]

With data-fix 0.3, these instances are required so an
Ord instance for NExpr can be inferred.

[sjakobi]

I discovered the missing Ord instance for NExpr while updating dhall-nixpkgs.

The Ord1 instance for NKeyName is modeled after the Eq1 instance.

@Anton-Latukha Once this is merged, would you mind making another release? In addition to dhall-nixpkgs there might be other packages for which hnix-0.10.0 is currently unusable due to the missing instance.

[Anton-Latukha]

Great.

Then there is need to make quick 0.11.0 then.

[Anton-Latukha]

Why did you mention that it can be inferred, but decided not to infer it? Is there is a reason, or you see a lack of.

NExpr Ord and so the Eq - seems of be in the list of the the most importance to have, it is interesting that we not seen that they were not in place.

[sjakobi]

Then there is need to make quick 0.11.0 then.

What's the reason for the major version bump?

[sjakobi]

Why did you mention that it can be inferred, but decided not to infer it? Is there is a reason, or you see a lack of.

NExpr is just Fix NExprF.

In v0.3.0, data-fix replaced the instance

Ord (f (Fix f)) => Ord (Fix f)

with

Ord1 f => Ord (Fix f)

[Anton-Latukha]

Ok, yes.

Ok, yes I also returned, looked that NExpr is a type synonym.

[Anton-Latukha]

Then there is need to make quick 0.11.0 then.

What's the reason for the major version bump?

Well, the API change. I keep forgetting on interface expansion is the increase needed.

PVP way is unclear in this case, it says that version "may" stay the same. May meaning the choice decision is truly optional.

Well, on the second thought it indeed may be left a minor number.

It is probably good to remember that expansion of the API is optional and minor if there is no breakage of old deps, and major if there may be some sort of breakage because of the expansion.

[sjakobi]

Then there is need to make quick 0.11.0 then.

What's the reason for the major version bump?

Well, the API change. I keep forgetting on interface expansion is the increase needed.

PVP way is unclear in this case, it says that version "may" stay the same. May meaning the choice decision is truly optional.

It's better to stick with a minor bump in this case. Otherwise people would need to update the bounds in their cabal files again.

[Anton-Latukha]

Yes.

[sjakobi]

Thanks for the quick release! 👍