Looping in Adam Gundry, who did the work!
Simon
| -----Original Message-----
| From: ghc-devs [mailto:ghc-devs-bounces@haskell.org] On Behalf Of AntC
| Sent: 15 October 2013 22:42
| To: ghc-devs@haskell.org
| Subject: Re: Status update on overloaded records work?
|
| > Johan Tibell writes:
| >
| > I'm curious about the current status of the overloaded records work.
|
| Hi Johan, I think Adam has documented as he's gone along:
| http://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc/wiki/Records/OverloadedRecordFields/Pla
| n
| (And that points to implementation notes.)
|
| I'll leave Adam/Simon to comment more fully, but from my point of view
| as
| an observer with some 'skin in the game' ...
|
| > Is the design the same as when the project started?
|
| No:
| - Higher-Ranked types can't be supported
| -- and SPJ's initial proposal put a lot of weight on them.
| There's an easy (IMO) work-round;
| but it does compromise backward compatibility.
| + Type changing update _is_ supported (with limits)
| I think that was a justified trade-off for H-R types.
| + Adam has been able to support Lenses.
|
| - (What I was hoping for but didn't get.)
| No compiler flag to suppress creating selector functions.
| This would have allowed records to be declared re-using the same
| name;
| but left it entirely to the developer as to how to access them.
| (I was trying to promote the TH and/or Lenses cottage industries.)
|
| > Did we manage to keep the types simple?
|
| I guess simplicity is in the eye of the beholder ;-)
| For 'gettable' fields, the sugar is as per SPJ's suggestion.
| There isn't sugar for updating.
|
| The un-sugared types are pretty gnarly.
| I suspect that'll mean obscure and confusing error messages.
|
|
| AntC
|
| _______________________________________________
| ghc-devs mailing list
| ghc-devs@haskell.org
| http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs
