On Saturday 04 March 2006 19:35, Claus Reinke wrote: > a more promising approach would be to specify the user-level features > of the current system, then to show at least two translations: one > for the current desugaring, and a second one to demonstrate at least > one implementation of those features in an alternative record system. > > the point of that exercise would be to figure out which features of > the current user-level view of labelled fields would make a later > transition difficult, and to mark them as deprecated or to remove > them now. in other words, the "reference" translation should not be > to the most powerful record system imagined so far, but to a fairly > simple one, which all "better" record systems ought to be able to > mimic. > > my current favourite for such a simple alternative record system > would be Daan Leijen's "Extensible records with scoped labels" > (TFP2005): http://www.cs.uu.nl/~daan/pubs.html
Yes. Daan Leijen's record system is the best of all the ones I have read about, not least because of its simplicity. > ps. the Curry folks are looking into adding labelled fields, > and seem to have decided to go for a trial implementation > of Daan's system before making any decisions: > http://www.informatik.uni-kiel.de/~curry/listarchive/0406.html I would very much like to have this. I wouldn't mind if it were qualified as an experimental extension, etc.. If not in Haskell' then maybe at least in some future ghc version? Ben _______________________________________________ Haskell-prime mailing list Haskell-prime@haskell.org http://haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-prime
