> Karl-Filip Faxen wrote: > > | Yes, things are clearer and I rather like the idea. > | The only thorny issue is that the update function for > | field 'wibble' is formed from but not equal to the > | field name itself. > > This could be solved by having an abstract type Field > thusly (*):
[snip] All very cute :-)) The downside is of course that it would no longer be a compatible extension to the existing Haskell language. Current Haskell programs consider the field name to be a function from types to field values. If we are to retain compatibility then we need to preserve this. Still very cute though :-) [snip] -Rob _______________________________________________ Haskell mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell
