StricterLabelledFieldSyntax

[Iavor Diatchki]

Hello,

On Sun, Jul 26, 2009 at 10:01 PM, Isaac
Dupree<ml at isaac.cedarswampstudios.org> wrote:
> Iavor Diatchki wrote:
>>
>> Hello,
>> I am strongly against this change.  The record notation works just
>> fine and has been doing so for a long time.  The notation is really
>> not that confusing and, given how records work in Haskell, makes
>> perfect sense (and the notation has nothing to do with the precedence
>> of application because there are no applications involved).  In short,
>> I am not sure what problem is addressed by this change, while a very
>> real problem (backwards incompatibility) would be introduced.
>> -Iavor
>
> a different approach to things that look funny, has been to implement a
> warning message in GHC.  Would that be a good alternative?

Not for me. I use the notation as is, and so my code would start
generating warnings without any valid reason, I think.  What would
such a warning warn against, anyway?

-Iavor