Re: [ghc-steering-committee] RecordDotSyntax: please express a view

Hi, TL;DR: Support acceptance, preference for (.foo) over .foo. I guess many people are excited, so overall good to get this. I recently stopped using Haskell for something where readability was the primary goal for lack of nested access and updates. So yay! :-) I am a bit unhappy about the “Higher-rank fields” problem. Not that I use such field often, but it came up in the “Overloaded do” proposal. Maybe accepting this will increase the chances of a getField variant that works even in impredicative cases. I hope pattern matching will follow, but no need to have it in this proposal. About the contentious issue of (.foo) vs. .foo, I am squarely in the (.foo) camp, for all the gut-feeling reasons given elsewhere in abundance. My main reasons: feels like a syntactic section to me, and less danger of wat effects for people coming from languages with the a.foo .bar .baz idiom… I will not veto the current form, but Eric may be in less of a minority that he thinks. The precedence rule f a.b.c 10 being f (a.b.c) 10 makes sense when one comes from Ocaml or similar languages, or has thought about record updates for a long time. There is a trace of a feeling that this is un-Haskellish in the same way as f a { b = c } 10 is. But at least we don't allow spaces around the dot, so it is probably fine. Cheers, Joachim Am Montag, den 09.12.2019, 22:57 +0000 schrieb Simon Peyton Jones via ghc-steering-committee:

Dear steering committee

I'm the shepherd for the RecordDotSyntax proposal. https://github.com/ghc-proposals/ghc-proposals/pull/282

I recommend acceptance: https://github.com/ghc-proposals/ghc-proposals/pull/282#issuecomment-5634776...

Please reads the proposal, and as much of the discussion as you feel able, and respond in the next week or two to indicate your views.

Remember: ask technical questions on the Github discussion thread, and use this mailing list for more evaluative discussion of judgement or opinion.

I'd love every member of the committee to express a view. This proposal has attracted a lot of interest.

Thanks

Simon

...

-----Original Message----- From: ghc-steering-committee On Behalf Of Joachim Breitner Sent: 28 November 2019 10:11 To: ghc-steering-committee@haskell.org Subject: [EXTERNAL] [ghc-steering-committee] Please review #282: RecordDotSyntax, Shepherd: Simon PJ

Dear Committee,

this is your secretary speaking:

RecordDotSyntax language extension proposal has been proposed by Neil Mitchell and Shayne Fletcher https://github.com/ghc-proposals/ghc-proposals/pull/282 https://github.com/shayne-fletcher-da/ghc-proposals/blob/record-dot- syntax/proposals/0000-record-dot-syntax.md

This is going to be a tricky one. It is partly about whitespace, so it has attracted a _lot_ of community interest, by far the most so far. To navigate that ship, I propose Simon PJ as the shepherd, because he is a excellent moderator and community manager, and because he has the necessary authority to hopefully get a verdict accepted.

Please reach consensus as described in https://github.com/ghc-proposals/ghc-proposals#committee-process I suggest you make a recommendation, in a new e-mail thread with the proposal number in the subject, about the decision, maybe point out debatable points, and assume that anyone who stays quiet agrees with you.

Thanks, Joachim -- Joachim Breitner mail@joachim-breitner.de http://www.joachim-breitner.de/

_______________________________________________ ghc-steering-committee mailing list 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.org https://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-steering-committee -- Joachim Breitner mail@joachim-breitner.de http://www.joachim-breitner.de/