... | ... | @@ -52,7 +52,7 @@ So we have decided to avoid the extensible record debate, but how can we have mu |
|
|
|
|
|
1. **[Simple Overloaded Record Fields](records/overloaded-record-fields) (SORF)**. Pure (Plan B).
|
|
|
1. **[ Type Directed Name Resolution](http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/haskell-prime/wiki/TypeDirectedNameResolution) (TDNR)**. Pure (Plan B), but without abstraction over fields of the same name.
|
|
|
1. **[Agda style Records](records/name-spacing) (FDR)** Pure (Plan A)
|
|
|
1. **[Agda-derived Records](records/name-spacing) (ADR)** Pure (Plan A)
|
|
|
1. **[Frege-derived Records](records/name-spacing) (FDR)**. Uses (Plan A) + (Plan B).
|
|
|
|
|
|
1. **Are there any other approaches?**
|
... | ... | |