I'm not sure I like the idea of Haskell trying to guess a constructor
to use from a tuple. What happens if multiple constructors could
match, for one?
On Thu, Jan 13, 2022 at 6:17 PM Richard Eisenberg <lists@richarde.dev> wrote:
We could potentially have this. It reminds me of Agda's record syntax, where you can construct any record (which is like your tuple) with the keyword `record`.
Is it worth having yet another feature in the language? I'm not sure, myself.
Richard
On Jan 13, 2022, at 5:12 PM, Daneel Yaitskov <dyaitskov@gmail.com> wrote:
Cafe,
There is a group of GHC extensions and complementary classes
to make writing Haskell code a bit sweeter such as:
- {} - Num (fromIntegral)
- OverloadedStrings - IsString
- OverloadedLists - IsList
So I have an inductive question - why there is no OverloadedTuples?
I haven't found a discussion thread about this topic.
I could imagine following tuple syntax interpretation:
{-# LANGUAGE OverloadedTuples #-}
data Foo = FooA Int String | FooB String Foo deriving (Show, Eq, IsTuple)
mkFoo :: Foo
mkFoo = (1, "hello")
mkFoo2 :: Foo
mkFoo = ("abc", (1, "hello"))
Sometimes expected type name is known without data constructor.
So such expression is more concise.
--
Best regards,
Daniil Iaitskov
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
To (un)subscribe, modify options or view archives go to:
http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Only members subscribed via the mailman list are allowed to post.
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
To (un)subscribe, modify options or view archives go to:
http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Only members subscribed via the mailman list are allowed to post.