Hello, On Sun, Jul 26, 2009 at 10:01 PM, Isaac Dupree<m...@isaac.cedarswampstudios.org> wrote: > Iavor Diatchki wrote: >> >> Hello, >> I am strongly against this change. The record notation works just >> fine and has been doing so for a long time. The notation is really >> not that confusing and, given how records work in Haskell, makes >> perfect sense (and the notation has nothing to do with the precedence >> of application because there are no applications involved). In short, >> I am not sure what problem is addressed by this change, while a very >> real problem (backwards incompatibility) would be introduced. >> -Iavor > > a different approach to things that look funny, has been to implement a > warning message in GHC. Would that be a good alternative?
Not for me. I use the notation as is, and so my code would start generating warnings without any valid reason, I think. What would such a warning warn against, anyway? -Iavor _______________________________________________ Haskell-prime mailing list Haskell-prime@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-prime