Re: I'm afraid of OverloadedLabels

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
1 message Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: I'm afraid of OverloadedLabels

AntC
> On Sun Jul 9 21:04:33 UTC 2017, MarLinn wrote:

> ...

> Isn't it about time to allow explicit imports, and more
importantly,
> explicit non-imports for instances?
> Some time ago I fantasised about some special syntax for
this,
> calling the (very rough) idea "aspects" ...

Sorry, I didn't realise that "aspects" thread
was about controlling instance scope.
I did try to start a thread on instance scope
a few days ago
https://mail.haskell.org/pipermail/haskell-cafe/2017-July/127435.html

I am interested in use cases for scope-controlling
instances.

Specifically I'm not seeing how scoping instances
(instances of what, exactly?) helps with the "record
problem".
Typically if you have several record types with the
same-named field,
you want all of those to be in scope, where the field-access
gets resolved according to the record's type.

The `DuplicateRecordFields` extension now provides
reasonable support for that, doesn't it?


AntC
_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
To (un)subscribe, modify options or view archives go to:
http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
Only members subscribed via the mailman list are allowed to post.
Loading...