Changes between Version 1 and Version 2 of Design/TypeNaming


Ignore:
Timestamp:
Sep 23, 2008 10:39:25 PM (7 years ago)
Author:
simonpj
Comment:

--

Legend:

Unmodified
Added
Removed
Modified
  • Design/TypeNaming

    v1 v2  
    174174Whether "`%`" is the best notation isn't clear to me, but the
    175175notation must be reasonably quiet.
     176
     177=== Alternatives to proposal 2 ===
     178
     179 * One alternative would be simple but brutal: simply have
     180   no "`%`" escape notation.  In the above examples, saying
     181   `Succ` at the the type level would mean the data type `Succ`,
     182   and there would be no way to get to the data constructor.
     183   You lose.
     184
     185 * Another alternative would be to allow the type name to
     186   disambiguate.  Thus `Nat.Succ` would name the data construtor.
     187   (Obvious question: the overlap with the module qualifiers.)
     188
     189Neither of these alternatives seem compatible with lists and
     190tuples at the type level. Maybe they can still use the "`%`" notation?