... | ... | @@ -243,6 +243,9 @@ Should there be a difference between `f`, `g` and `h`? It would seem odd if `f` |
|
|
|
|
|
Of course, it is fine to use a qualified name in a record update.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I've implemented the first option, adding a new warning `-fwarn-qualified-overloaded-record-fields` which is on by default.
|
|
|
|
|
|
## Outstanding bugs
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
... | ... | @@ -275,7 +278,6 @@ Tests in need of attention: |
|
|
|
|
|
- Sort out GADT record updates.
|
|
|
- Sort out data families with duplicated fields.
|
|
|
- Sort out qualified names.
|
|
|
- Improve error messages from typechecker:
|
|
|
|
|
|
- Unsolved `Accessor p f` where `p` is something silly
|
... | ... | @@ -284,3 +286,4 @@ Tests in need of attention: |
|
|
- How should dfunids/axioms and instances be propagated?
|
|
|
- Where should automatic instances be generated for GHCi?
|
|
|
- How should deprecation work for fields? Not at all?
|
|
|
- Document the extension, including new warnings. |