The Future of Haskell discussion at the Haskell Workshop

[Nicolas Oury]

Hello,

I may be wrong but can't we keep old records and add new ones (as =20
proposed in the First Class Modules paper)
with a different syntax?

Ussual records and extensible records are both usefull, in different =20
cases.

Best regards,

Nicolas Oury
Le mardi, 9 sep 2003, =E0 14:52 Europe/Paris, Johannes Waldmann a =E9crit =
:

> On Tue, 9 Sep 2003, Adrian Hey wrote:
>
>> I rarely use named fields in my Haskell progs with Haskell as it is =20=

>> ...
>
> but you sure agree records are useful for collecting heterogenous =
data?
> for example, see data DynFlags here:
>
> http://cvs.haskell.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/fptools/ghc/compiler/main/=20=

> CmdLineOpts.lhs
>
>> IMHO preserving the status quo wrt records should be low priority.
>> It really doesn't bother me much if new (useful) language features =20=

>> break
>> existing code.
>
> but this might be an issue for others, who have to maintain "legacy" =20=

> code.
>
> best regards,
> --=20
> -- Johannes Waldmann ---- http://www.informatik.uni-leipzig.de/~joe/ =
--
> -- joe@informatik.uni-leipzig.de -- phone/fax (+49) 341 9732 204/209 =
--
>
> .. ..  Viertes Leipziger Jongliertreffen, 17. - 19. Oktober 2003  .. =
..
> .. ..  http://www.informatik.uni-leipzig.de/~joe/juggling/vier/   .. =
..
>
> _______________________________________________
> Haskell mailing list
> Haskell@haskell.org
> http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell
>