ghci -XNoTraditionalRecordSyntax does not complain of unsupported extensions
for me.
The flag appears to just disable record construction and update syntax, and
record patterns, and record syntax in GADT declarations. It has probably never
been used.
Simon
| -Original Message-
|
On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 10:47:14PM +, AntC wrote:
Ticket #3356 claims that {-# LANGUAGE NoTraditionalRecordSyntax #-} was
implemented in 7.2.1.
But GHCi v7.2.1 complains Unsupported extension: NoTraditionalRecordSyntax.
What (if anything) actually got implemented?
It was implemented
Ian Lynagh igloo at earth.li writes:
On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 10:47:14PM +, AntC wrote:
Ticket #3356 claims that {-# LANGUAGE NoTraditionalRecordSyntax #-} was
implemented in 7.2.1.
But GHCi v7.2.1 complains Unsupported extension:
NoTraditionalRecordSyntax.
What (if
Simon Peyton-Jones simonpj at microsoft.com writes:
ghci -XNoTraditionalRecordSyntax does not complain of unsupported extensions
for me.
OK, it's effective in v7.4.1, as Ian says.
The flag appears to just disable record construction and update syntax, and
record patterns, and record
Gábor Lehel illissius at gmail.com writes:
..., but DORF actually requires less type system magic than
SORF, and also already has a working prototype implementation, ...
... My main complaint against DORF is
that having to write fieldLabel declarations for every field you want
to use is
