[m-rev.] for review: don't put duplicate instance decls into .int0 files

[Zoltan Somogyi]

On 2023-06-30 06:46 +02:00 CEST, "Peter Wang" <novalazy at gmail.com> wrote:
>> +% The next two predicates have identical definitions, but one is for
>> +% item_instance_infos, while the other is for item_abstract_instance_infos.
>> +% XXX Ideally, this should not be necessary.
> 
> I think you could introduce a type item_instance_info(Body), and define
> item_instance_info and item_abstract_instance_info as equivalence types.

That would work here, and in fact that was the first approach I thought of,
but it would require extra code everywhere else where the current code
just does a coerce.

> The change looks fine.

Thank you.

Zoltan.