Records in Haskell
jmaessen at alum.mit.edu
Sat Jan 14 15:28:20 CET 2012
On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 6:52 PM, Simon Peyton-Jones
<simonpj at microsoft.com> wrote:
> [... good summary of the issues...]
> But note what has happened: we have simply re-invented SORF. So the
> conclusion is this:
> the only sensible way to implement FDR is using SORF.
An obvious question at this point: can records have unboxed fields?
I'm worried a bit about the kinds that can appear in a has constraint:
> A feature of SORF is that you can write functions like this
> k :: Has r "f" Int => r -> Int
> k r = r.f + 1
I'm thinking out loud about the implementation implications here.
More information about the Glasgow-haskell-users