In that hypothetical context, the field name wouldn't be usable as a function—at least without future Dependent Haskell. On Mon, Sep 20, 2021, 1:19 PM Tom Ellis < tom-lists-haskell-cafe-2017@jaguarpaw.co.uk> wrote:
On Mon, Sep 20, 2021 at 01:13:43PM -0400, David Feuer wrote:
Does one field name for one datatype always refer to a field with the same type? Or is there some wacky extension that would allow things like
data Foo = Bar { zoom :: Int } | Baz { zoom :: Char }
I'm hoping I don't have to worry about the latter possibility....
Me too! Under such circumstances what would the type of field-as-function be? _______________________________________________ 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.