TDNR without new operators or syntax changes

[Jeremy .]

Yes, that it indeed was I meant. AntC seems to be replying to a much more complicated/invasive proposal than what I had intended, apologies if I wasn't clear. (I see in retrospect that I may have misunderstood the original TDNR proposal, understandably leading to confusion.)


1. If the compiler encounters a term f a, and there is more than one definition for f in scope (after following all of the usual rules for qualified imports);

2. And exactly one of these definitions matches the type of a (or the expected type of f if given);

3. Then this is the definition to use.


That is all, although point 2 could be extended to consider the return type of f or other arguments as well. Even with the extension on, it would have no effect on programs which compile without it.


This has nothing to do with ORF, which relies on magic type classes (although there is some overlap in what it can achieve). The primary use-case I had in mind is disambiguating name clashes between local and/or unqualified imports.


Cross-posting to cafe and libraries as this doesn't seem to have attracted a lot of interest in users. Maybe it's just a boring proposal, maybe I didn't post it to the right list.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.haskell.org/pipermail/glasgow-haskell-users/attachments/20160522/ae4ded22/attachment.html>