Hi! > So in summary, here is my proposal: > > No specific "extensible records" system. > > Define record update to be a function just like record selection is. > > Allow these functions to be in type classes.
I do not understand the second and third point: As I understand your idea, record selectors and updaters should still be defined by the datatype declaration. What does it then mean that they be "allowed" to be defined in type classes? Would that happen automatically? Cheers, /kff _______________________________________________ Haskell mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell
