Changes between Version 10 and Version 11 of Records/DeclaredOverloadedRecordFields/ImplementorsView


Ignore:
Timestamp:
Feb 21, 2012 2:48:16 AM (2 years ago)
Author:
guest
Comment:

--

Legend:

Unmodified
Added
Removed
Modified
  • Records/DeclaredOverloadedRecordFields/ImplementorsView

    v10 v11  
    7272The definition of `get` uses ‑XDisambiguateRecordFields style (with ‑XNamedFieldPuns). 
    7373 
    74 [It's a wart that in the record declaration, we've had to repeat the type of `customer_id` when the `fieldLabel` decl has already stipulated `Int`. It is legal syntax to omit the type in the record decl, but that currently has a different effect: 
    75 {{{ 
    76     data ... = Cust_NA { customer_id, custName :: String, ... } 
    77 }}} 
    78 currently means `customer_id` is to be same type as `custName`. 
    79  
    80 Opportunity for improvement! ] 
     74    [It's a wart that in the record declaration, we've had to repeat the type of `customer_id` when the `fieldLabel` decl has already stipulated `Int`. It is legal syntax to omit the type in the record decl, but that currently has a different effect: 
     75{{{ 
     76        data ... = Cust_NA { customer_id, custName :: String, ... } 
     77}}} 
     78    currently means `customer_id` is to be same type as `custName`. 
     79 
     80    Opportunity for improvement! ] 
    8181 
    8282=== Record/field update ===