On 2/26/12 12:38 AM, Anthony Clayden wrote:
Wren/all
Please remember SPJ's request on the Records wiki to stick
to the namespace issue. We're trying to make something
better that H98's name clash. We are not trying to build
some ideal polymorphic record system.
I believe my concern is a namespace issue. There are certain
circumstances under which we do not want names to clash, and there are
certain circumstances under which we do want them to clash; just as
sometimes we want things to be polymorphic and sometimes not.
I haven't been following all the different proposals out there, but the
ones I did see before tuning-out all took the stance that for each given
field either (1) this field name is unique and always clashes, or (2)
this field name is shared and never clashes. This is problematic for a
number of reasons. The particular reason I raised is that there are
times when we would like for a field name to be shared, but only shared
among a specified group of records and clashing with all other records
(which may themselves form groups that share the name as well).
That's not a complaint against DORF per se. I haven't read the DORF
proposal, so perhaps it already handles this issue. Rather, it's a
general concern that I haven't seen discussed very much while skimming
this thread.
--
Live well,
~wren
_______________________________________________
Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list
Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
