Changes between Version 1 and Version 2 of Design/TypeNaming


Ignore:
Timestamp:
Sep 23, 2008 10:39:25 PM (6 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?