Is `Data.Integer.Base.signAbs` unnecessarily strict?

[jamesmckinna]

The definition seems unnecessarily strict; why not instead write the following, which has moreover the advantage (I think!?) that signAbs i is then definitionally equal to sign i ◂ ∣ i ∣...

data SignAbs : ℤ → Set where
  _◂_ : (s : Sign) (n : ℕ) → SignAbs (s ◃ n)

signAbs : ∀ i → SignAbs i
signAbs -[1+ n ] = Sign.- ◂ ℕ.suc n
signAbs + n      = Sign.+ ◂ n

So like all bad good ideas/good bad ideas, I failed to test this first, and it doesn't typecheck...
...UPDATED unless you also change the auxiliary definition s ◃ n and ... don't try this at home.
Sheer folly on my part.