John Meacham wrote: > On Wed, Jan 24, 2007 at 05:03:18PM -0800, Stefan O'Rear wrote: >> Haskell-98 style records are widely acknowledged as sucking, and there are >> something like half a dozen proposals all of which are widely acknowledged >> as vastly superior. Expect to be stuck with H98 records for the remainder >> of time; see "bikeshed". > > actually, the problem is that we keep calling them records. Haskell 98 > records are actually labeled fields, not records, and as labeled fields > they perform just fine. > > Not that records or named tuples or whatever you like to call them > wouldn't be useful but they would likely be something in addition to labeled > fields, not replacing it. (Not that the current labeled field mechanism > couldn't be improved some.) > > personally, something based on Daan's scoped labels proposal is the > clear leader of the bunch. > > > John
I also really liked Daan's "Extensible records with scoped labels", which is available at http://www.cs.uu.nl/~daan/pubs.html#scopedlabels for those who still have not read it. The system seems very simple, but also seems to have required moving beyond an imperative viewpoint to come up with. _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list [email protected] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
