On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 08:50:42PM +0000, Simon Marlow wrote: > On 24/02/10 18:23, Ian Lynagh wrote: > While I agree with these points, I was converted to record punning > (actually record wildcards) when I rewrote the GHC IO library. Handle > is a record with 12 or so fields, and there are literally dozens of > functions that start like this: > > flushWriteBuffer :: Handle -> IO () > flushWriteBuffer Handle{..} = do > > if I had to write out the field names I use each time, and even worse, > think up names to bind to each of them, it would be hideous. > > There are reasons to find this distasteful, yes, but I think the > alternative is much worse. > > I'm not proposing record wildcards (yet) *cough* labelled-field > wildcards, but punning is a step in the right direction.
Yes. I too have had this issue with jhc and am a big fan of GHC's field wildcards. It is motivation enough for me to require a newer version of ghc for compiling jhc. I'd support field wildcards in 2011, but would understand if people thought it was too soon. John -- John Meacham - ⑆repetae.net⑆john⑈ - http://notanumber.net/ _______________________________________________ Haskell-prime mailing list Haskell-prime@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-prime