Extensible records in Haskell

Adrian Hey ahey@iee.org
Thu, 7 Nov 2002 07:43:44 +0000

On Wednesday 06 November 2002 10:48 pm, Nicolas Oury wrote:
> I am going to try to persuade you:
> * first of all, it seems to be needed in order to make "first class
> modules"  (cf your paper) . And I think that a true module system would
> be useful. But I may be wrong.
> * As far as I am concerned, in fact, I need it to do something on the
> typing of problems like database queries, where the naming is quite
> concerning. I think for example, HaskellDB (don't know if it was this
> actually the name) was doing something like this.
> * It would be used : it is easy to understand, safe and avoid to rename
> with different names some fields that should have the same name.
> * ...
> I could try find other reasons tomorrow.

I'll second this request.

I would also like a better records and/or first class modules system
with extensibility and sub-typing or row polymorphism (not sure which
is best or most feasible).

I would also like to be able to use field names properly with
extistentials. (Hmm, I suspect having existentials and extentsibility
is difficult?)

Also, is there some good technical reason why we can't allow punning?

My wish list anyway.

Adrian Hey