Records in Haskell
greg at gregweber.info
Sun Jan 15 13:44:59 CET 2012
That is a downside the Frege author had - one of the reasons he
abandandoned this style of implementation. It is listed on the wiki.
On Sat, Jan 14, 2012 at 3:28 PM, Jan-Willem Maessen
<jmaessen at alum.mit.edu>wrote:
> 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.
> -Jan-Willem Maessen
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Glasgow-haskell-users