| To make up for this, I've now extended the example code to | include more operations, cryptic infix operators, and more | type class tricks (we have examples of record field selection, | symmetric record concatenation, record field removal, record | field update, record field renaming). Claus I did read your message. I'm afraid I couldn't figure out exactly what you were proposing, so I filed it hoping that the ensuing discussion would clarify. For example, what does it mean to "remove the need to declare labels, make them identifiable as such in use"? I had similar questions about your other two options. Then, the code that you enclosed appeared to show that you could do without any extension at all. Records are a huge swamp with a very large number of possible variants and design choices. Perhaps you might gain more traction if you were ruthlessly specific about what language changes you advocate, and what benefits they would have (versus the existing situation). Simon