Simon Peyton Jones <[email protected]> writes: > | I don't think this would work in the case where there are no fields > | initialised? > > Oh yes, silly me. I was thinking that then we wouldn’t need to look at > 'labels' at all, but that's not true. > > Well, at least then I'd replace [PostTc id [FieldLabel] with (PostTc > ConLike). This makes it like ConPatOut in HsPat. Then the (Located id) > field is redundant (we can get it from the ConLike), but that’s only > true after typechecking, so maybe simpler to keep both. > > It amounts to moving the call to conLikeFieldLabels from tcExpr > (RecordCon ...) to dsExpr (RecordCon ...). A small thing but I think > it'd be better. > Mathew, did you ever get to this?
Cheers, - Ben
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ ghc-devs mailing list [email protected] http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs
