GHC support for the new "record" package

[Neil Mitchell]

Edward: Note that x = #x is a perfectly legal definition, and now you
can have your lenses exactly as before. When discussing this with
Simon, I actually proposed that x = #x be automatically generated by
the data definitions, and then nub'd after. Not sure it's a good idea
or not, but it's certainly possible.

I was also of the opinion that data should produce FieldSelector
classes etc, but _not_ link them to IV, specifically to avoid problems
with the stab lenses. I expect that if you only wanted stab lenses,
and never selectors, you could (probably) tie them up in a way that
did the resolution nicely without ambiguity problems.

With those two pieces I think you can still have your: foo^.bar.baz.quux

Thanks, Neil

On Tue, Jan 27, 2015 at 9:19 AM, Adam Gundry <adam at well-typed.com> wrote:
> On 27/01/15 09:16, Simon Peyton Jones wrote:
>> Adam, are you willing to update the wiki page to reflect the latest state of the conversation, identifying remaining choices? That would be v helpful.
>
> I'm on it now. It'll take a little while because I'm merging plans A and
> B into a single coherent story.
>
> Adam
>
>
> --
> Adam Gundry, Haskell Consultant
> Well-Typed LLP, http://www.well-typed.com/
> _______________________________________________
> ghc-devs mailing list
> ghc-devs at haskell.org
> http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs