GHC support for the new "record" package

[Adam Gundry]

On 27/01/15 09:19, Adam Gundry 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.

Done. As I understand it, the key remaining choices (flagged up with the
phrase "Design question" are):

1. What are the IV instances provided in base? These could give selector
functions, lenses, both or neither.

2. How do we identify implicit values? Either we have a syntactic cue
(like `#` or `@`) or we do some magic in the renamer.

  - If the former, are normal unambiguous record selectors available as
well? Or do we allow/generate definitions like x = #x, as Neil suggests?

  - If the latter, what happens when a record field and an implicit
value are both in scope?

Adam


-- 
Adam Gundry, Haskell Consultant
Well-Typed LLP, http://www.well-typed.com/