Re: [Haskell-cafe] Named arguments to functions?

Hi Saurabh, Implicit parameters already look like named arguments:

:set -XImplicitParams let f = ?x + ?y let { ?y = 5; ?x = 10 } in f 15 let g = f where { ?x = 5; ?y = 10 } g 15

Perhaps we could extend TypeApplications to support the following more natural syntax:

f @(?y = 5) @(?x = 10) which would be syntaxic sugar for the code above.

Sylvain On 13/11/2016 14:38, Saurabh Nanda wrote:

Thank you for your reply.

If you are interested in something like this, you may want to start a discussion of the design on one of the other lists, or perhaps write up a proposal for GHC.

While I would like the general area of records getting better in Haskell, I don't think I have the necessary technical chops to lead a GHC proposal around this. Do you know any proposal/extension in GHC that is already trying to solve: (a) records, and/or (b) named arguments?

The proposals currently under discussion are on the `github` URL.

Possible to update the prime.haskell.org http://prime.haskell.org website to reflect the current state of affairs?

-- Saurabh.

On 10/11/2016 22:59, Iavor Diatchki wrote:

...

Hello,

I would say that this is a too complex of a change to discuss for Haskell Prime without implementation or prior experience. If you are interested in something like this, you may want to start a discussion of the design on one of the other lists, or perhaps write up a proposal for GHC.

The proposals currently under discussion are on the `github` URL.

Cheers, -Iavor

On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 2:16 AM, Saurabh Nanda mailto:saurabhnanda@gmail.com> wrote:

Hi Everyone,

I was going through https://prime.haskell.org/wiki/Process#Proposals https://prime.haskell.org/wiki/Process#Proposals and noticed the following:

> Ideally the language change should be implemented already, so that experience gained with the implementation can inform the discussion

Is this a hard requirement? I would like to see the ability to pass named arguments to functions somehow (most probably through anonymous records). I'm unaware of any existing language extension that solves this problem. Does this render the discussion out-of-bounds from a Haskell Prime perspective? Has this already been proposed and considered?

Also, going by what is given on the Wiki, I'm confused about where to check the current status of proposals that are being considered. Which is the primary link:

* https://prime.haskell.org/query?status=new&status=assigned&status=reopened&group=state https://prime.haskell.org/query?status=new&status=assigned&status=reopened&group=state * Or, https://github.com/haskell/rfcs https://github.com/haskell/rfcs

-- Saurabh.

_______________________________________________ Haskell-prime mailing list Haskell-prime@haskell.org mailto:Haskell-prime@haskell.org http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haskell-prime http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haskell-prime