Hi everyone,
It sounds as though this change isn’t too controversial, and everyone who has voiced an opinion has given some level of agreement. If there are no other thoughts, Joachim, shall I declare this proposal accepted on the thread?
Thanks,
Tom
On 4 Nov 2020, at 15:22, Tom Harding mailto:tomjharding@live.co.uk> wrote:
Hi all,
I’d like to open committee discussion for DuplicateRecordFields without ambiguous field access. Other committee members have already commented, and I’ll say I’m strongly in favour of this proposal. I definitely see the suggestion here as “tidying up” an unintuitive - perhaps even counterintuitive - behaviour.
https://github.com/ghc-proposals/ghc-proposals/pull/366
Thanks,
Tom
PS. Sorry for my recent absence; I think it has been a very strange few months for all us!
On 2 Nov 2020, at 09:08, Joachim Breitner mailto:mail@joachim-breitner.de> wrote:
Dear Committee,
this is your secretary speaking:
DuplicateRecordFields without ambiguous field access
was proposed by Adam Gundry
https://github.com/ghc-proposals/ghc-proposals/pull/366
https://github.com/adamgundry/ghc-proposals/blob/no-ambiguous-selectors/prop...
I’ll propose Tom Harding as the shepherd.
Please guide us to a conclusion as outlined in
https://github.com/ghc-proposals/ghc-proposals#committee-process
Thanks,
Joachim
--
Joachim Breitner
mail@joachim-breitner.demailto:mail@joachim-breitner.de
http://www.joachim-breitner.de/
_______________________________________________
ghc-steering-committee mailing list
ghc-steering-committee@haskell.orgmailto:ghc-steering-committee@haskell.org
https://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-steering-committee
_______________________________________________
ghc-steering-committee mailing list
ghc-steering-committee@haskell.orgmailto:ghc-steering-committee@haskell.org
https://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-steering-committee
