... | ... | @@ -3,7 +3,7 @@ |
|
|
|
|
|
This page summarises a possible design that would allow
|
|
|
different records to share a single field label. Although it's a simple enough
|
|
|
idea, there are numerous ramifications. Records are a swamp!
|
|
|
idea (summarised under "Nonextensible records with polymorphic selection & update" on at [Records](records))there are numerous ramifications. Records are a swamp!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The **base design** has the folllowing distinct components:
|
... | ... | @@ -424,7 +424,7 @@ Of course this isn't very satisfactory either |
|
|
# Relationship to Type Directed Name Resolution
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This proposal is quite closely related to the Type Directed Name Resolution? idea, becuase TDNR
|
|
|
This proposal is quite closely related to the [ Type Directed Name Resolution](http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/haskell-prime/wiki/TypeDirectedNameResolution) idea, becuase TDNR
|
|
|
would internally generate `Has` constraints exactly as described above. The difference is
|
|
|
that TDNR wasn't intended to support *abstraction* over the constraint, and was explained
|
|
|
rather differently. |