Records in Haskell

[Greg Weber]

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...
URL: <http://www.haskell.org/pipermail/glasgow-haskell-users/attachments/20120115/56dd6993/attachment-0001.htm>