Edward: Note that x = #x is a perfectly legal definition, and now you can have your lenses exactly as before. When discussing this with Simon, I actually proposed that x = #x be automatically generated by the data definitions, and then nub'd after. Not sure it's a good idea or not, but it's certainly possible.
I was also of the opinion that data should produce FieldSelector classes etc, but _not_ link them to IV, specifically to avoid problems with the stab lenses. I expect that if you only wanted stab lenses, and never selectors, you could (probably) tie them up in a way that did the resolution nicely without ambiguity problems. With those two pieces I think you can still have your: foo^.bar.baz.quux Thanks, Neil On Tue, Jan 27, 2015 at 9:19 AM, Adam Gundry <[email protected]> wrote: > On 27/01/15 09:16, Simon Peyton Jones wrote: >> Adam, are you willing to update the wiki page to reflect the latest state of >> the conversation, identifying remaining choices? That would be v helpful. > > I'm on it now. It'll take a little while because I'm merging plans A and > B into a single coherent story. > > Adam > > > -- > Adam Gundry, Haskell Consultant > Well-Typed LLP, http://www.well-typed.com/ > _______________________________________________ > ghc-devs mailing list > [email protected] > http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs _______________________________________________ ghc-devs mailing list [email protected] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs
