True, and thank you for clarifying that. I was thinking of the names of the
field data, not the type-level name of the field:
name = Field :: "name" ::: String
-IRS
________________________________________
From: acow...@gmail.com [acow...@gmail.com] on behalf of Anthony Cowley
[acow...@seas.upenn.edu]
Sent: Tuesday, April 16, 2013 6:13 PM
To: Sturdy, Ian
Cc: haskell-cafe@haskell.org
Subject: Re: [Haskell-cafe] data types with overlapping component names (in one
module)?
On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 4:05 PM, Sturdy, Ian <sturdy...@mail.wlu.edu> wrote:
> 'vinyl' uses type-level literal strings and is very slick (although all
> fields with the same name have the same type)
This is not entirely true, depending on what you mean by "name". The
following is just fine. You only have naming issues if you want to
give @Field::"baz":::Int@ a name, that name is, unsurprisingly, tied
to the field type of Int.
{-# LANGUAGE DataKinds, TypeOperators #-}
import Data.Vinyl
type Foo = '["baz" ::: Int]
type Bar = '["baz" ::: String]
x :: PlainRec Foo
x = Field =: 2
y :: PlainRec Bar
y = Field =: "Two"
Anthony
>
> -IRS
> ________________________________________
> From: haskell-cafe-boun...@haskell.org [haskell-cafe-boun...@haskell.org] on
> behalf of Johannes Waldmann [waldm...@imn.htwk-leipzig.de]
> Sent: Tuesday, April 16, 2013 8:17 AM
> To: haskell-cafe@haskell.org
> Subject: [Haskell-cafe] data types with overlapping component names (in one
> module)?
>
> What is the current situation: can we have two types
> with overlapping component names in one module?
>
> module M where
> data T1 = C1 { foo :: Int }
> data T2 = C2 { foo :: String }
>
> It seems not (ghc says: Multiple declarations of 'foo'). This comes close:
> http://www.haskell.org/ghc/docs/7.6.2/html/users_guide/syntax-extns.html#disambiguate-fields
> but still requires the definitions to reside in different modules?
>
> This is a major pain (it forces me to spread the source over several files),
> and also a show-stopper when selling Haskell to OO folks, who "naturally"
> assume that a class also denotes a scope. (And that you could nest them.)
>
> Are/were there plans/proposals to address this?
>
> - J.W.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Haskell-Cafe mailing list
> Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
> http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Haskell-Cafe mailing list
> Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
> http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
