[ghc-steering-committee] Please review #366: DuplicateRecordFields without ambiguous field access, Shepherd: Tom Harding

[Tom Harding]

Hi all,

I’d like to open committee discussion for DuplicateRecordFields without ambiguous field access. Other committee members have already commented, and I’ll say I’m strongly in favour of this proposal. I definitely see the suggestion here as “tidying up” an unintuitive - perhaps even counterintuitive - behaviour.

https://github.com/ghc-proposals/ghc-proposals/pull/366

Thanks,
Tom

PS. Sorry for my recent absence; I think it has been a very strange few months for all us!

On 2 Nov 2020, at 09:08, Joachim Breitner <mail at joachim-breitner.de<mailto:mail at joachim-breitner.de>> wrote:

Dear Committee,

this is your secretary speaking:

DuplicateRecordFields without ambiguous field access
was proposed by Adam Gundry
https://github.com/ghc-proposals/ghc-proposals/pull/366
https://github.com/adamgundry/ghc-proposals/blob/no-ambiguous-selectors/proposals/0000-no-ambiguous-field-access.rst

I’ll propose Tom Harding as the shepherd.

Please guide us to a conclusion as outlined in
https://github.com/ghc-proposals/ghc-proposals#committee-process

Thanks,
Joachim
--
Joachim Breitner
 mail at joachim-breitner.de
 http://www.joachim-breitner.de/


_______________________________________________
ghc-steering-committee mailing list
ghc-steering-committee at haskell.org
https://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-steering-committee

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.haskell.org/pipermail/ghc-steering-committee/attachments/20201104/78129c05/attachment.html>