You know, another solution to the records problem, which is not quite
as convenient but much simpler (and has other applications) is to
allow local modules.
module Foo where
module Bar where
data Bar = Bar { x :: Int, y :: Int }
module Baz where
data Baz = Baz { x :: Int, y :: Int }
f a b = Bar.x a + Baz.y b
On Tue, Nov 17, 2009 at 5:18 AM, Simon Peyton-Jones
| What's the status of the TDNR proposal [1]? Personally I think it is a | very good idea and I'd like to see it in Haskell'/GHC rather sooner | than later. Working around the limitations of the current record | system is one of my biggest pain points in Haskell and TDNR would be a | major improvement. Thus I wonder if someone is actively working on | this proposal?
It's stalled. As far as I know, there's been very little discussion about it. It's not a trivial thing to implement, and it treads on delicate territory (how "." is treated). So I'd need to be convinced there was a strong constituency who really wanted it before adding it.
I've added an informal straw poll to the bottom of [1] to allow you to express an opinion.
Also I'm not very happy with the "stacking operations" part, and I'd like a better idea.
Simon
_______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe