[ghc-steering-committee] #668: Allow reserved identifiers as fields in OverloadedRecordDot, recommendation: accept

[Simon Peyton Jones]

I'm happy to accept this proposal.

B > A > C > D.

As you'll see on the GitHub thread
<https://github.com/ghc-proposals/ghc-proposals/pull/668#issuecomment-2724063625>,
I have convinced myself that (C), allowing keywords in traditional record
syntax, is untenable.  And I really don't think we should reject (D).

I'm favouring (B) over (A) for simple consistency reasons; the fewer
exceptions the better.  Plus at least one person has said the extra
generality would be useful.

Simon
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.haskell.org/pipermail/ghc-steering-committee/attachments/20250314/aefdd4c7/attachment-0001.html>