Keep the present Haskell record system!

[Bulat Ziganshin]

Hello Claus,

Monday, March 6, 2006, 4:30:04 PM, you wrote:

>>> my own opinion is that this scheme is like classes - they can be
>>> resolved at compile time in most real cases but noone do it because
>>> code will be too large. if some function can accept any records which
>>> has field 'a' then to use this function on records of different types
>>> we need either to do specialization or use scheme with non-constant
>>> access time

CR> for those who haven't seen it, the following paper explored the former
CR> possibility with good success (at a time when type classes where 
CR> still somewhat simpler:):

CR>     Dictionary-free Overloading by Partial Evaluation
CR>     Mark P. Jones, ACM SIGPLAN Workshop on Partial 
CR>     Evaluation and Semantics-Based Program Manipulation, 
CR>     Orlando, Florida, June 1994.
CR>     http://www.cse.ogi.edu/~mpj/pubs/pepm94.html

2-3 weeks ago i rolled in ghc-users list list of suggestions to
improve ghc efficiency and make it close to C++. in particular, i
proposed to make more aggressive compile-time specialization (at cost of
less aggressive inlining of non-polymorphic functions) like the C++
templates common-used implementation. may be, i don't know something,
but i think that in most cases we can end up with fully specialized
code

-- 
Best regards,
 Bulat                            mailto:Bulat.Ziganshin at gmail.com