I have seen some talk about fixing this, but none anywhere close to reality. As far as what you can use now, there are several libraries implementing alternatives to records; 'vinyl' uses type-level literal strings and is very slick (although all fields with the same name have the same type), while 'fields' uses template Haskell (and I think there are some others as well). I have used 'vinyl' a fair amount with great success; the others I cannot evaluate from experience. -IRS ________________________________________ From: haskell-cafe-bounces@haskell.org [haskell-cafe-bounces@haskell.org] on behalf of Johannes Waldmann [waldmann@imn.htwk-leipzig.de] Sent: Tuesday, April 16, 2013 8:17 AM To: haskell-cafe@haskell.org Subject: [Haskell-cafe] data types with overlapping component names (in one module)? What is the current situation: can we have two types with overlapping component names in one module? module M where data T1 = C1 { foo :: Int } data T2 = C2 { foo :: String } It seems not (ghc says: Multiple declarations of 'foo'). This comes close: http://www.haskell.org/ghc/docs/7.6.2/html/users_guide/syntax-extns.html#dis... but still requires the definitions to reside in different modules? This is a major pain (it forces me to spread the source over several files), and also a show-stopper when selling Haskell to OO folks, who "naturally" assume that a class also denotes a scope. (And that you could nest them.) Are/were there plans/proposals to address this? - J.W. _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe